The Kerala High Court on Wednesday directed the makers of 'The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond' not to release the film until the pending pleas against it are finally heard and decided.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas made the observation while considering three petitions seeking cancellation of the certificate issued by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). The petitioners contended that the film portrays Kerala in a distorted manner and could potentially trigger communal tension.

As court hours drew to a close, Senior Advocate S Sreekumar informed the Bench that the film is scheduled to hit theatres on Friday, and that overseas distribution rights have already been sold. In response, the judge indicated that he would hear all sides and that the release could be deferred until the arguments conclude.

“Then you can stall it right now. If you are putting the Court into a corner then I will state until we complete the hearing...I will give you enough and more time, you can argue but don't release it till the arguments are over...I will take up the matter tomorrow but I don't want them (petitioners) to come back tomorrow and say that you have already given the rights….without concluding the arguments; I can’t. Don’t make the entire issue infructuous…let them not give out the right or anything before the Court takes decision. The apprehension expressed by the petitioners is probably genuine, so once they release the rights tomorrow, then what is the point?” Justice Thomas orally remarked.

The film is a sequel to 'The Kerala Story', a controversial Hindi movie that centred on the alleged recruitment of women from Kerala by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The earlier film had faced sharp criticism over its depiction of religious radicalisation and its perceived impact on the State’s image.

The fresh petitions were filed amid continuing controversy over the sequel, with the petitioners arguing that it presents Kerala through a communal lens and could adversely affect law and order. They also claimed that the film’s title and promotional material unfairly stigmatise the State and may disturb communal harmony.

One plea, filed by Kannur resident Sreedev Namboodiri, alleged that the promotional content of the sequel contains themes and dialogues capable of provoking violence. Another petition by Freddie V Francis sought a ban on the release and objected to the use of the word “Kerala” in the title. A third petition, moved by Advocate Atul Roy, similarly challenged the CBFC certification and requested directions to remove “Kerala” from the film’s name.

According to the petitioners, the CBFC failed to properly evaluate the film’s potential impact on public order, decency and morality as mandated under Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. They further contended that the movie harms the dignity and reputation of the people of Kerala, thereby violating Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, along with Article 19(1)(a), which permits reasonable restrictions on free speech.

During an earlier hearing on Tuesday, the Court had expressed its readiness to view the film, observing that the concerns raised appeared prima facie justified. The Bench noted that the movie was being promoted as “inspired by true events” and prominently featured the State’s name in its title, even though the sequel’s storyline reportedly has no direct connection to Kerala.

The producers, however, urged the Court to first determine whether the petitions are maintainable. On Wednesday, Sreekumar argued that the reliefs sought cannot be granted merely on the basis of a two-minute teaser. He maintained that the film has complied with all legal requirements and that once the CBFC has certified it, the High Court cannot substitute its own view. He also submitted that the petitions were filed 16 days after the teaser’s release and that the petitioners cannot claim to represent the “collective dignity of people of Kerala.”

Advocates Maitreyi Sachchidananda Hegde, Rizla KM and Deepika K Sasi appeared for Namboodiri. Advocates Sreerag Shylan, Ferha Azeez and Devananda S represented Francis.

The film’s producer, Sunshine Pictures, was represented by Senior Advocate S Sreekumar along with Advocates Ameet Naik, Madhu Gadodia, Nithyesh, Annirudh and Jasmeet.
(With Inputs from Bar and Bench)