The court said that three dialogues have been muted.
Mumbai:
The Bombay High Court today permitted the release of the film ‘Hamare Baarah’ on June 21 after the filmmakers agreed to make three changes. The court, after a thorough review, concluded that the film did not contain any objectionable content against the Quran or the Muslim community. Instead, the court found the movie to be aimed at the “upliftment of women”.
The court said that three dialogues have been muted and all other contentious parts have been removed. The bench also advised further edits to ensure that no scenes would be deemed offensive. For instance, a scene where a character threatens to kill his daughter while invoking God’s name was pointed out as potentially problematic. The court suggested that removing this line would not compromise the filmmakers’ creative freedom.
A division bench comprising Justices BP Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla said that the film, starring actor Annu Kapoor, was a “thinking movie” designed to engage the audience intellectually rather than being a mindless entertainer.
“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 high court said.
The court addressed the concerns raised by the petitioners, who claimed the film was derogatory towards Muslims and distorted Islamic teachings. These objections led to the postponement of the film’s release. However, after reviewing the film post the deletion of objectionable content as directed by the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC), the court found no grounds to continue the ban.
The high court noted the premature release of the film’s trailer before CBFC certification, which had contributed to the controversy. As a consequence, the court imposed a penalty on the filmmakers to be donated to a charity of the petitioners’ choice, citing the “unpaid publicity” the litigation had generated for the film.
“Violation was there vis-a-vis the trailer. So you will have to pay something towards a charity of the petitioner’s choice. Cost will have to be paid. This litigation has got the film so much unpaid publicity,” the court said. “We don’t think there is anything in the movie that would incite any violence. If we felt so we would be the first ones to object to it. Indian public is not so gullible or that silly.”
The official judgment will be available on the Bombay High Court’s website.
