Supreme Court Holds Allottees Who Elected RERA Remedy Cannot Subsequently Seek Interim Relief Under Section 9 Arbitration Act Lodging FIR Does Not Amount To Instigation: Supreme Court Quashes Section 306 IPC Case Against In-Laws Over Husband's Suicide Vigilant Citizen Deserves Acknowledgment: Supreme Court Sets Strict Timelines For 20-Year-Old Subway Project, Lauds Litigant's Relentless Legal Battle Lawyer Cannot Disclose Privileged Information On TV Even If Client Becomes Adversary: Supreme Court Upholds Suspension Of Advocate Rizwan Siddique, Slaps ₹5 Lakh Cost On Both Parties Supreme Court Modifies 3-Year Bar Practice Rule; Orders 1-Year Practice Coupled With 2-Year Academy Training & Clerkship Model Made A Scapegoat Under Pressure Of Public Outcry: Delhi High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life In POCSO Case Doctrine Of Lis Pendens Applies To Court Auctions; Purchaser Bound By Outcome Of Pending Specific Performance Suit: Allahabad High Court Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Section 65B Evidence Act Objection Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal Two-Month Time Limit To File Evidence Under Rule 45 Of Trade Marks Rules 2017 Is Mandatory; Non-Compliance Results In Deemed Abandonment: Madras High Court SEBI Act | Special Law Overrides General Law': Bombay High Court Quashes Police FIR Against Ex-Axis Mutual Fund Chief Dealer In Front-Running Case 'Truth Cannot Be Sacrificed At The Altar Of Rigid Timelines': Calcutta High Court Upholds Section 311 CrPC Powers At Any Stage For Just Decision 'A Dispute Does Not Cease To Be Criminal Merely Because It Involves Commercial Transaction': Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses To Quash Cheating FIR In ₹4.39 Cr Land Deal Holding In Designated Centres Only Way If Foreigner Cannot Be Expelled: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail To Declared Foreigner Who Illegally Re-Entered India Madras High Court Issues Guidelines Against Police Harassment Under Guise Of Enquiry, Mandates Written Summons Under Section 179 BNSS Grave Ramifications On Rights': Punjab & Haryana High Court Mandates Strict Compliance Of Section 82 CrPC Before Declaring Accused As Proclaimed Person 'Interacting With Father Benefits Child's Well-Being': Kerala High Court Grants Virtual Access To Father After Mother Takes Child Abroad Violating Restraint Order Agreement In Family Member’s Name Cannot Shield Occupants Under Section 53-A TP Act': Uttarakhand High Court Upholds Eviction Of Licensees Not Filling A Lacuna: Subsequent Forensic Report From Criminal Case Can Be Produced As Additional Evidence In Civil Suit: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Nomination In FIR Not Enough For Vicarious Liability: Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused Under Section 149 IPC Demanding Separations From Depending In-Laws Constitute Mental Cruelty: Calcutta High Court Upholds Divorce Human Memory Not Photographic: Allahabad High Court Upholds Murder Conviction, Reiterates 'Falsus In Uno' Maxim Has No Application In India Litigant Claiming To Be Sub-Tenant Before Revenue Authorities Cannot Set Up Plea Of Adverse Possession In Civil Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Civil Death": Orissa High Court Rules Blacklisting Of Contractor Without Specific Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice Delay Irrespective Of Number Of Years Ought To Be Condoned In Land Acquisition Matters': Punjab & Haryana High Court Condones 3953 Days Delay 'Notary Cannot Act As Marriage Officer': Madhya Pradesh High Court Accepts Notary's Apology With ₹2 Lakh Welfare Cost, Directs Display Board Against Notarizing Marriages

Release of Film "Hamare Baarah" Over Alleged Misrepresentation of Quranic Verses Stayed By Bombay High Court and Upheld By Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court has temporarily stayed the release of the film "Hamare Baarah" in response to a petition challenging its certification. The petition, filed by Azhar Basha Tamboli Ltd and others, alleges that the film misrepresents Quranic verses and portrays Muslim women in a derogatory manner, violating constitutional provisions and specific sections of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and the Indian Penal Code.

The petition was presented under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus against the Chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to revoke the certification of "Hamare Baarah" and prevent its public release. The petitioners argued that the film's content misinterprets a verse from the Quran (Aayat 223), depicting married Muslim women as lacking individual rights, which could incite communal discord and harm societal harmony.

The court, consisting of Justices N.R. Borkar and Kamal Khata, reviewed the arguments presented by both parties. Mr. Khandeparkar, representing the petitioners, emphasized that the film trailer lacked necessary disclaimers and included derogatory content towards the Islamic faith and married Muslim women​​ . He argued that the release of the film could hurt the sentiments of Muslims and provoke societal hatred.

In contrast, Mr. Sethna, representing the respondents, countered that the film had undergone all necessary certifications, including excisions and modifications as per the CBFC's guidelines​​ . He stated that the objections raised were baseless as the petitioners had not seen the final version of the film and were relying solely on an uncertified trailer.

The court found that a prima facie case was made by the petitioners. Justice Khata noted that the matter required thorough examination and could not be concluded summarily due to the absence of the film’s producers despite being served notices . The court decided that the film itself might need to be reviewed to address the conflicting claims properly.

"We find that prima facie a case is made out by the Petitioner. The issue of locus of the petitioner will have to be decided. However, we are of the view that the matter will have to be heard before any conclusion is drawn," stated the bench, highlighting the need for further examination of the petitioner's locus and the film's content .

The Bombay High Court's interim order restrains the release of "Hamare Baarah" until June 14, 2024, providing time for a detailed hearing and reply from the respondents. This judgment underscores the judiciary's cautious approach in balancing freedom of expression with societal harmony and religious sentiments. The case is set to return to the regular court on June 10, 2024, for further deliberations .

 

Date of Decision: June 5, 2024

Azhar Basha Tamboli Ltd & Ors vs. Ravi S Gupta & Ors

Latest Legal News