The Delhi high court on Thursday refused to stay the release of the movie “Udaipur Files - Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder”, saying that the petitioner has failed to establish how irreparable loss would be caused to him if release is not stayed. The movie, produced by Amit Jani, is scheduled to hit the theatres on Friday.
The movie, which is based on the 2022 murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur, has been accused of vilifying the Muslim community. It was initially slated to be released on July 11, but was temporarily stayed by the Delhi high court on July 10. On July 21, the Centre cleared it for release, subject to the filmmaker carrying out six additional edits. However, on August 1,the Centre withdrew its order and passed a fresh order on August 6, upholding the movie’s certification.
On Thursday, the bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela was hearing the petition filed by Mohd Javed –– an accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case –– who sought a stay on the release of the movie during the pendency of his writ challenging the Centre’s August 6 order.
Rejecting the plea, the court said the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case and the movie’s screening would not prejudice his right to fair trial since the same would be conducted by the judge uninfluenced by what is being depicted in the movie.
{{/usCountry}}Rejecting the plea, the court said the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case and the movie’s screening would not prejudice his right to fair trial since the same would be conducted by the judge uninfluenced by what is being depicted in the movie.
{{/usCountry}}“This court is of the view that the petitioner has not been able to establish a prima facie case in his favour and also that the exhibition of the film is not likely to cause any harm to the right of fair trial of the petitioner to seek fair trial in as much as the trial would be conducted by the learned judge uninfluenced by what is being depicted in the film on account of restraining the judge,” the bench said.
Taking note of the amount invested by movie’s producer Amit Jani, the court said: “The producer has already invested a huge amount in producing the film as submitted by the counsel for the producer and he has spent his lifetime earnings in producing the film. Thus in case the exhibition of the film is stayed, at this juncture the balance of convenience will be disturbed which in our opinion lies in favour of the producer. We also opine that the petitioner has failed to establish that any irreparable loss will be caused to the petitioner if the movie is released. In view of the discussions made, we find ourselves unable to agree with the prayer made for grant of interim relief. The prayer made for staying the release of the film is hereby rejected.” A detailed copy of the verdict is yet to be released.
The court, however, issued notice in Javed’s plea against Centre’s August 6 decision of clearing the movie for release and fixed October 16 as the next date of hearing.
Javed, represented by senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy and advocate Saumya Dwivedi, had asserted that the release of the movie would prejudice his right to fair trial, since the same was at a nascent stage and had the likelihood of prejudicing the witnesses.
“This film says that I am a conspirator of murder. The dialogue setting is from the chargesheet. My role as ascribed in the chargesheet has been lifted and used in the film,” Guruswamy said, asserting that the court had only examined six witnesses and was yet to examine 160 more witnesses and the movie contained dialogues from the chargesheet. The movie, Guruswamy said, had an enormous amount of hate speech and the petition was dismissed mechanically without due application of mind and was devoid of a reasoned analysis for its rejection.
The Centre, represented by additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma along with standing counsel Amit Tiwari had asserted that the order was issued after careful consideration and due application of mind by senior officials.
The producer Amit Jani’s counsel Gaurav Bhatia asserted that the movie had been re-certified pursuant to 61 cuts and an edited disclaimer and was produced pursuant to taking NOC from the victim’s family and was based on the incident. He further submitted that Jani’s intention was to not vilify any community and its message was “positive.”
A National Investigation Agency and the accused was charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). The trial is pending before a special NIA court in Jaipur.