Limitation For Executing Partition Decree Not Suspended Till Engrossment; Right To Seek Engrossment Subsists During 12-Year Execution Period: Allahabad HC Unilateral Revocation Of Registered Gift Deed Through Sub-Registrar Is Void, Donor Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mediation Cannot Be Forced Upon Unwilling Party In Civil Suits; Consent Of Both Sides Essential: Bombay High Court Unmarried Daughter Not Entitled To Freedom Fighter Pension If Gainfully Employed At Time Of Father's Death: Calcutta High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Denied For Lack Of Formal Divorce From First Marriage: Delhi High Court ONGC Cannot Demand Security From Award Holder After Giving ‘No Objection’ To Withdrawal Of Deposited Amount: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sedative Drugs Like Tramadol Impact Mental Fitness Of Declarant; Bombay High Court Acquits Man Relying On Doubtful Dying Declarations Postal Tracking Report Showing 'Refusal' Not Conclusive Proof Of Service If Denied On Oath: Delhi High Court Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Decide On Legality Of Charging Fees For Downloading FIRs From 'SAANJH' Portal Wife’s Educational Qualifications No Bar To Seeking Maintenance If Actual Employment Is Not Proven: Orissa High Court Mere Telephonic Contact Without Substance Of Conversation Cannot Establish Criminal Conspiracy: Madhya Pradesh High Court Serious Allegations Like HIV/AIDS Imputations Require Corroboration, Cannot Rest Solely On Unsubstantiated Testimony: Karnataka High Court Family Court Cannot Refuse Mutual Consent Divorce Merely Because Parties Are Living Separately 'Without Valid Reason': Kerala High Court Collective Attempts By Advocates To Overbear Presiding Officer Not Protected Professional Conduct: Madras High Court Dismisses Quash Petitions No Legal Evidence Required To Forward A Person To Trial? Rajasthan HC Slams Police For Implicating Accused In NDPS Case Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Accused Must Be Physically Present In Court To Furnish Bonds Under Section 91 BNSS: Punjab & Haryana High 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