The Kerala High Court on Thursday issued a stay on the release of the highly controversial film, The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond, following petitions challenging its certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas passed the interim order while hearing petitions that raised concerns over the movie’s content and its potential to incite communal disharmony. The court directed the CBFC to review the petitions within two weeks and temporarily barred the film’s release for 15 days.
The petitions argued that the film misrepresents Kerala and could provoke violence and social tensions. The petitioners claimed that the film’s portrayal of Kerala’s religious and social fabric was misleading and could incite hatred among communities.
The court observed that there appeared to be a lack of due diligence by the CBFC in certifying the film without fully considering its societal impact. “There is an absence of application of mind,” the order stated, emphasizing the need for careful review before release.
The court expressed concern that the film, which is a sequel to the earlier The Kerala Story, could foster contempt and communal attitudes. “Repeated portrayal of similar themes, as evident from the sequel’s scenes, risks depicting Kerala as a hub of fanaticism, which is contrary to its reputation for communal harmony,” the order noted.
While acknowledging the judiciary’s usual hesitance to interfere in film releases, the court said it must intervene when content has the genuine potential to incite violence or unrest.
The Kerala Story 2 continues the narrative of the original film, which claimed to depict the recruitment of women from Kerala into ISIS. The sequel has drawn widespread criticism for allegedly depicting religious radicalization and damaging Kerala’s image.
One petitioner, Sreedev Namboodiri of Kannur, argued that the film’s promotional material, including the teaser and trailer, contained provocative themes and dialogues, such as the line “ab sahenge nahin… ladenge,” which he said could incite violence.
Namboodiri also challenged the CBFC’s certification, alleging that the board failed to evaluate the film’s impact on public order, decency, and morality, as mandated under the Cinematograph Act.
Another petitioner, Freddie V Francis, sought a ban on the film altogether, asserting that referencing Kerala in the title falsely associated the state with terrorism and forced conversions, thereby promoting hate.
He also questioned the claim that the film is based on true events, alleging it was a form of “hate marketing.”
A third petition by advocate Athul Roy, which raised questions about the film’s certification and title, was dismissed by the court.
In its order, the court emphasized the importance of safeguarding constitutional rights such as freedom of speech while balancing the need to prevent communal discord. The court’s directive comes amid ongoing controversy over the film and its predecessor, which have sparked heated debates about religious radicalization and depiction of Kerala.
The CBFC has been instructed to review the petitions and reconsider the certification, with the film’s release on hold for two weeks pending further orders.
