NEW DELHI: A day before Annu Kapoor's 'Hamare Baarah' was slated to hit the theatres, the Supreme Court has stayed release stating, "If teaser is so offensive then what about the whole movie."
The Supreme Court's initial stand has left members of the public questioning the halt, as the same Court in 2014 had refused to interfere in the release of Amir Khan's movie, PK.
Also Read - Bombay High Court refuses to stay release of film 'Hamare Baarah' [Read Order]
Dismissing the plea, the apex court had then told the petitioner, "If you don't like then don't watch the film but don't bring religious facets in it", adding that, "these are matters of art and entertainment and let them remain so."
However, in case of 'Hamare Baarah' the Court has stayed the release until the Bombay High Court hears on merits, a plea challenging the release of the film on the grounds that it was derogatory to Islam and married Muslim women.
The Supreme Court also directed the Bombay High Court to take a quick decision on the matter, while hearing an appeal against the Bombay High Court's refusal to halt the release at the nth hour.
The Court also refused to accept the submission that the objectionable scenes have been removed from the promotional teaser, as per the Bombay High Courts order.
It observed, We saw the teaser today morning and all the scenes are there. It added, If the teaser is so offensive then what about the whole movie Prima facie, it seems you have failed, since you yourself deleted the scenes from the teaser.
Earlier the Bombay High Court had refused to stay the release of the movie 'Hamare Baarah', citing resulting losses to the filmmaker caused by such a move at the 'nth hour'.
Adding that the locus standi for an individual to claim such a relief at the last hour is undecided still, a division bench of Justices Kamal Khata and Rajesh Patil had said, We are totally in disagreement... One individual in a country of 130 crore citizens can not bring such a petition which can stall a film release, without granting any guarantee whatsoever for costs incurred by filmmakers in such a case.
The Court also pointed out that when such a petition is brought in, right before the release, it is also not reasonable to expect the courts to hear them on all aspects.
In any case, the counsel for the film producers, Advocate Rahul Narichania, had submitted that they had made two cuts in the film on the petitioner's concern that the content of the dialogues was objectionable.
The film would be issued a fresh certificate for release in theatres by late Friday, post these cuts, Advocate Advait Sethna, appearing for the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), had told the Court.
Originally meant to be released on Friday, the film's unveiling was attempted to be stalled at the last hour with the petition seeking that the release be stayed.
