POCSO Presumption Is Not a Dead Letter, But ‘Sterling Witness’ Test Still Governs Conviction: Bombay High Court High Courts Cannot Routinely Entertain Contempt Petitions Beyond One Year: Madras High Court Declines Contempt Plea Filed After Four Years Courts Cannot Reject Suit by Weighing Evidence at Threshold: Delhi High Court Restores Discrimination Suit by Indian Staff Against Italian Embassy Improvised Testimonies and Dubious Recovery Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Allahabad High Court Acquits Two In Murder Case Sale with Repurchase Condition is Not a Mortgage: Bombay High Court Reverses Redemption Decree After 27-Year Delay Second Transfer Application on Same Grounds is Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Clarifies Legal Position under Section 24 CPC Custodial Interrogation Is Not Punitive — Arrest Cannot Be Used as a Tool to Humiliate in Corporate Offence Allegations: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Partnership Act | Eviction Suit by Unregistered Firm Maintainable if Based on Statutory Right: Madhya Pradesh High Court Reasonable Grounds Under Section 37 of NDPS Act Cannot Be Equated with Proof; They Must Reflect More Than Suspicion, But Less Than Conviction: J&K HC Apprehension to Life Is a Just Ground for Transfer When Roots Lie in History of Ideological Violence: Bombay High Court Transfers Defamation Suits Against Hamid Dabholkar, Nikhil Wagle From Goa to Maharashtra Violation of Income Tax Law Doesn’t Void Cheque Bounce Offence: Supreme Court Overrules Kerala HC, Says Section 138 NI Act Stands Independent Overstaying Licensee Cannot Evade Double Damages by Legal Technicalities: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Is Not a Stamp of Truth: Punjab & Haryana High Court Trademark Law Must Protect Reputation, Not Reward Delay Tactics: Bombay High Court Grants Injunction to FedEx Against Dishonest Use of Its Well-Known Mark Commercial Dispute Need Not Wait for a Written Contract: Delhi High Court Upholds Rs.6 Lakh Decree in Rent Recovery Suit Against Storage Defaulter Limitation Begins From Refusal, Not Date of Agreement—Especially When Title Was Under Litigation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sale by Karta of Ancestral Property Without Legal Necessity Is Voidable, Not Void: Madras High Court Dismisses Sons’ Appeal Demand for Gold at 'Chhoochhak' Ceremony Not Dowry – Demand Must Connected With Marriage: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claims Cannot Be Decided on Sympathy – Involvement of Offending Vehicle Must Be Proved: Supreme Court Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Ladder for Career Advancement – It Ends Once Exercised: Supreme Court In Absence of Minimum Fee, Compounding by Revenue Officials Is Not Criminal Misconduct: Kerala High Court Clarifies Power, Quashes FIR Against Two Accused If You’re in Service on 31st March, You Get the Revised Pay: Supreme Court Affirms Right to 2017 Pay Revision for March 2016 Retirees Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court

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