Bombay HC Restrains Release Of Film "Hamare Baarah"; Notes Allegation That It Will Hurt Sentiments Of Muslims
The Bombay High Court issued an interim restraint order against the exhibition, circulation, or public availability of the film "Hamare Baarah” on any public forum or platform.
The interim relief came following a writ petition filed by Azhar Basha Tamboli Ltd under Article 226 of the Constitution aiming to revoke the certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and prevent the film's release.
A Division Bench of Justice N. R. Borkar and Justice Kamal Khata observed, “Having heard all Counsel at some length, 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. The producers are not present though served. A reply would be necessary from the Respondents 7, 8 and 14. The film may also be required to be viewed to draw any conclusion with regard to the rival contentions.”
Advocate Mayur Khandeparkar represented the petitioner, while AGP KN Solunke appeared for the respondents.
The petitioners argued that the film was in “complete contravention” of the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and violated constitutional provisions under Articles 19(2) and 25 of the Constitution. They claimed that the film, particularly its trailer available on YouTube, portrayed married Muslim women as lacking individual rights, a portrayal based on a misreading of the Quranic verse "Aayat 223." This, they argued, was derogatory to the Islamic faith and the dignity of married Muslim women in India.
Despite being served notices, neither the producers nor the director appeared in Court, prompting the petitioners to seek interim relief. They requested the Court to stay the film's release pending a final decision.
The trailer of the movie was showcased before the Court highlighting dialogues and visuals which were deemed offensive. The petitioners also referenced various legal provisions, including Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act and Sections 153A, 292, 293 295A and 505 of the IPC to support the claim that the film could hurt the sentiments of the Muslims and may create hatred in the society.
CBFC defended the certification process. He stated that the film was certified only after necessary modifications and deletions of objectionable content. He asserted that the trailers on YouTube and Book My Show were uncertified and that measures would be taken to withdraw them.
Additionally, the distributor clarified that they were no longer associated with the film, distancing themselves from its release schedule.
After viewing the trailer and considering the arguments, the Court found that the petitioners had prima facie made out a case. Recognising the need for a detailed hearing, the Court restrained the producers from releasing the film until June 14, 2024.
Accordingly, the High Court listed the matter for hearing by a regular bench on June 10, 2024, with the respondents required to file their replies by then.
Cause Title: Azhar Basha Tamboli Ltd & Ors. v. Ravi S Gupta & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:22759-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Mayur Khandeparkar, Aneesa Cheema, Rekha Musale and Nitin Rajguru
Respondents: AGP KN Solunke; Advocates Advait Sethna, P Roychaudhary, Madhu Godadia, Sujoy Mukherji, Deveesha Tudekar, Anand and Naik
