Highlights
- Bench says public apprehension over film’s claims cannot be overlooked
- Court questions whether Central Board of Film Certification exercised statutory powers fully
- Hearing adjourned after producers seek time to file further arguments
Court weighs public concerns
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that anxieties among sections of the public about the upcoming release of The Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond merit consideration, particularly as the filmmakers have promoted the project as being based on true events while referencing the state in its title.
The bench led by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was hearing petitions seeking to quash the censor certificate granted to the film and halt its scheduled release on 27 February. Petitioners, including a Kannur-based litigant, argued that the teaser contained material capable of triggering communal tension.
Questions over certification process
During the hearing, the court asked the certification authority whether it had adequately exercised its statutory responsibilities before clearing the film. It also remarked that portraying Kerala in a manner suggesting widespread social discord could create a misleading impression, noting the state’s history of religious coexistence.
The bench referred to an earlier matter concerning the Malayalam film Haal, in which minor edits had been directed, and asked whether comparable scrutiny had been applied in this instance.
Petitioners challenge teaser and title
Petitioners maintained that although the makers had said the narrative does not focus on specific victims from Kerala, the continued use of the state’s name could foster prejudice. They also alleged that promotional material had been exhibited without certification.
Counsel for the producers questioned whether the petitions were maintainable, suggesting that objections relating to the state’s image would more appropriately fall under public interest litigation.
Hearing adjourned
The court indicated it was open to viewing the film before taking a final view. However, after hearing arguments for around half an hour, it granted the filmmakers time to submit additional contentions and a counter-affidavit.
Without issuing interim orders, the matter was adjourned to Wednesday for further hearing.
