On Tuesday (18th June), the Bombay High Court said that the bench watched actor Annu Kapoor starrer “Hamare Baarah” movie and found nothing objectionable in it that was against the Quran or the Muslim community. The bench observed that the film is in fact aimed at the upliftment of women and shows that people should not blindly follow Maulana but apply their minds. It added that there was nothing objectionable in the movie and that the Indian public is not so gullible or silly.
A division bench of the High Court comprising Justices BP Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla was hearing multiple petitions that sought a ban on the movie. The plea alleged that the movie incorrectly portrays the lives of married Muslim women as lacking independent rights due to a misinterpretation of “Aayat 223,” a verse in the Quran.
It further stated that the trailer includes dialogues and visuals which according to them were derogatory to the Islamic faith and married Muslim women in India.
The division bench stated that the film’s first trailer was objectionable, but that has been removed and all such objectionable scenes have been deleted from the movie. The court also noted that it was, in fact, a “thinking movie” and not the sort where the audience is expected to “keep their brains at home” and only enjoy it.
The High Court said, “The movie is in fact for the upliftment of women. The movie has a Maulana misinterpreting the Quran and in fact one Muslim man objects to the same in the scene. So this shows that people should apply their mind and not blindly follow such Maulanas.”
The Supreme Court had left the matter for the High Court to take an appropriate decision
Initially, the Bombay High Court postponed the release of the movie but it later permitted the release after the makers submitted that the objectionable portions would be deleted as directed by the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC).
Subsequently, the petitioners challenged the High Court ruling in the Supreme Court. Last week, the apex court stayed the film’s release and directed the HC to hear and take an appropriate decision in this matter.
During the hearing, the High Court referred to a few scenes that could be considered as objectionable and submitted that it would allow the film’s release if both parties agreed to these changes.
Referring to a scene where the man kills his daughter in the name of God, the bench said, “That may be objectionable. Doing something like this in the name of god may send the wrong signal. Removing this one line will not cause any hindrance to the creative freedom of the make.”
The bench said that if all the parties concerned agree to the deletion of the objectionable parts then consent terms could be submitted, after which the court would pass an order on Wednesday permitting the film’s release.
Moreover, the bench noted that in certain instances, it is the man who is misinterpreting the Quran, rather than the Maulana. The court said, “It’s a different when someone who is Maulana propagating something like this and an individual doing it. Tomorrow if you depict a pope or Christian then it’s a different thing. If the same speech was given by the antagonist then it makes no difference. When Maulana does it, he interprets the Quran and tells people which is a different thing.”
However, the bench said that it would be imposing a cost on the makers of the movie for releasing the trailer of the film even before receiving certification from the censor board.
The bench added that because of the litigation, the movie got unpaid publicity, so the makers would have to pay some cost towards a charity of the petitioners’ choice.
