The Kerala High Court on February 26 stayed the release of “The Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond”, which was scheduled for theatrical release on February 27, while directing the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to re-examine its certification following petitions challenging the film’s clearance.
As per reports, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed in his order that the teaser acknowledged to be part of the film prima facie had the potential to distort public perception and disturb communal harmony.
The Court further noted that the CBFC appeared to have overlooked the statutory guidelines governing film certification and stressed that dissemination of content capable of creating discord, disturbing law and order, or undermining social harmony cannot be shielded under the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
The interim order came after detailed arguments were heard from petitioners, the producer’s senior counsel, and CBFC representatives.
Earlier, although the Court had expressed willingness to view the film prior to adjudication, the producer declined, stating that the matter could be argued on merits.
During earlier proceedings, the Court had orally remarked that Kerala “lives in total harmony,” and warned that portraying isolated issues as widespread could create wrong impressions and incite passion.
Petitioners argued that certification had been granted without adherence to the statutory mandate under the Cinematograph Act, contending that the film’s title and narrative including themes of forced conversions and terrorism risked stigmatising the entire State.
They maintained that the content could incite communal tensions and noted that unrest and ill-will towards Kerala and Keralites had been reported after the release of the earlier film The Kerala Story, which had also faced multiple litigations.
Further objections were raised over the continued use of the term “Kerala” in the title, especially since the filmmakers themselves stated during promotions that the film presents a pan-Indian narrative and that even the victims depicted were not from Kerala. The petitioners argued that the title therefore misrepresents the subject matter and unfairly associates the State with the film’s themes.
During hearings, transcripts of the teaser uploaded on YouTube were produced, which the Court noted contained objectionable material.
CBFC’s counsel clarified that neither the teaser nor the trailer had been certified by the Board and that it bore no responsibility for content uploaded on social media. It was also argued that the teaser’s content did not appear in the final film.
However, the Court observed that no specific prayer had been made against the teaser or trailer and noted that separate remedies existed for objectionable online material.
Petitioners countered that indirect dissemination of contentious material through promotional content should not be permitted. The Court also orally remarked that without screening the film which the producer declined it was difficult to ascertain the actual content in question.
