The Kerala High Court on Tuesday expressed concern over the dithering stance of the producers of the film 'The Kerala Story 2 - Goes Beyond' with regard to the screening of the movie for the Court which is examining the censor clearance granted to the movie [Sreedev Namboodiri v. Union of India & Ors and connected cases]
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas remarked that the movie makers don't seem to be keen on the Court watching the movie
"You are not keen that the Court should watch the movie. You want the issue to be decided on whether this petition is a private litigation or a public litigation," the judge remarked.
The Court made the observation while hearing three petitions filed by individuals who sought to stay the film's release as well as the cancellation of the certificate granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), on the ground that the film misrepresented and stigmatised the state of Kerala which could lead to communal tensions and disharmony.
The Court when the hearing was going on in the morning, expressed its inclination to watch the film after noting that the petitioners concerns appeared primer facie justified since the movie was being projected as 'inspired by true events' and prominently carried the name of the state in its title, despite the sequels's storyline having no real connection to Kerala.
It thus asked the counsel representing the CBFC and the producer to get instruction on when the movie could be screened for the Court.
The counsel for the movie producers also said that the screening could be done.
However, when the matter resumed after the lunch time, Senior Counsel S Sreekumar, appearing for the producers, submitted that the Court should first decide whether the petitions before the Court are in the nature of a public interest litigation or private litigation.
This marked a departure from his earlier submission where he had agreed to remove the teaser and trailer of the movie while seeking time to get instructions on arranging the screening of the movie for the Court to watch.
Taking note of this change, Justice Thomas orally remarked that the producers were not interested in the Court viewing the film.
Since the CBFC and the producers did not get any instructions regarding the proposed screening, the Court indicated that it would consider the preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the petitions first.
The petitions before the Court have challenged the certification granted to the film on the ground that it puts Kerala in a communal light and could disturb law and order situation. The petitioners have argued that the film title and promotional materials unfairly stigmatise the State and could provoke this harmony.
One of the petitions was filed by Kannur native Sreedev Namboodiri, who stated that the promotional content of the sequel, contained themes and dialogues capable of inciting violence.
Another petition was filed by Freddie V Francis seeking a ban on the film's release and challenging the use of the term Kerala in the title, while a third petition moved by an advocate, Atul Roy, has also challenged the certification and naming of the film.
The petitioners have contended that the CBFC have failed to properly assess the impact of the movie on public order, decency and morality as required under Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act of 1952 and added that the film undermines the dignity and reputation of the people of Kerala, violating Article 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life and liberty) along with article 19(1)(a)of the Indian Constitution which provides reasonable restrictions to freedom of speech.
The petitions form part of a broader controversy surrounding the sequel to the earlier film 'The Kerala Story', which had also attracted widespread criticism over its portrayal of religious radicalisation of women.
Interestingly, the producers have maintained that the movie is about
The Court will continue hearing the matter tomorrow.
Advocates Maitreyi Sachchidananda Hegde, Rizla KM, Deepika K Sasi appeared for Namboodiri.
Advocates Sreerag Shylan, Ferha Azeez and Devananda S represented Francis.
The producer of the movie, Sunshine Pictures, was represented by senior counsel S Sreekumar and advocates Ameet Naik, Madhu Gadodia, Nithyesh, Annirudh and Jasmeet.
[Read Live Coverage]