Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act Delays in processing applications for premature release cannot deprive convicts of interim relief: Karnataka High Court Grants 90-Day Parole Listing All Appeals Arising From A Common Judgment Before The Same Bench Avoids Contradictory Rulings: Full Bench of the Patna High Court. Age Claims in Borderline Cases Demand Scrutiny: Madhya Pradesh HC on Juvenile Justice Act Bishop Garden Not Available for Partition Due to Legal Quietus on Declaration Suit: Madras High Court Exclusion of Certain Heirs Alone Does Not Make a Will Suspicious: Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Will Proof of Delivery Was Never Requested, Nor Was it a Payment Precondition: Delhi High Court Held Courier Firm Entitled to Payment Despite Non-Delivery Allegations Widowed Daughter Eligible for Compassionate Appointment under BSNL Scheme: Allahabad High Court Brutality of an Offence Does Not Dispense With Legal Proof: Supreme Court Overturns Life Imprisonment of Two Accused Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son

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

Similar News