19 May 2023, Mumbai: In a recent development, the Supreme Court has issued a stay order on the West Bengal government’s ban on the screening of the film ‘The Kerala Story.’ This decision allows theaters in West Bengal to resume the screening of the movie. The court has also directed the film’s producer to include a disclaimer in the movie by 5 pm on May 20th regarding the claim of the conversion of 32,000 Hindu and Christian women to Islam. Additionally, the Supreme Court has agreed to examine petitions challenging the orders passed by the Kerala High Court and Madras High Court, indicating its intention to establish guidelines for permissible content in films.
The Supreme Court’s Decision
A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud reviewed the matter and expressed its preliminary opinion that the ban imposed by the West Bengal government seems to be overly broad and not substantiated by the information presented in the state’s affidavit. Consequently, the court stayed the ban, allowing the film to be screened in West Bengal once again. By doing so, the court acknowledges that a complete prohibition is not warranted based on the evidence provided by the state.
Examination of Challenging Orders In addition to lifting the ban, the Supreme Court has directed the film’s producer to incorporate a disclaimer in the movie. This disclaimer will serve as a clarification regarding the claim made in the film that 32,000 Hindu and Christian women were converted to Islam. The court has set a deadline of 5 pm on May 20th for the inclusion of the disclaimer. This step ensures that viewers are informed about the contentious aspect of the film, allowing them to evaluate its content critically. Moreover, the Supreme Court has agreed to examine the petitions filed against the orders issued by the Kerala High Court and Madras High Court, both of which declined to impose a stay on the film’s release. This decision signifies the court’s intent to establish clear parameters for what can be shown in films. To determine the acceptability of the film’s content, the court acknowledges the necessity of watching the film itself. This move highlights the court’s responsibility to balance freedom of expression with potential social, religious, and legal implications.
Article By Yashika Desai.