The Kerala High Court on Thursday, 18 June issued an urgent notice to filmmaker Vipul Amrutlal Shah, producer of Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond, on a fresh petition challenging the film's certification and seeking removal of the word 'Kerala' from its title. The notice was issued by a bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, even as the court questioned whether the petition had lost its force given that the film had already been released and widely watched.

Why the Court Agreed to Hear the Plea

The bench initially raised doubts about whether the petition had become infructuous after the theatrical release. However, the petitioner's counsel pointed out that the film's OTT release — available on a digital platform since 1 May — kept the matter alive. The court accepted this argument and agreed to examine the petition, noting that the question of legal maintainability could be decided at the final hearing stage.

What the Petition Alleges

The petition challenges the certification granted to the film, alleging that its content damages the reputation of Kerala and fosters social disharmony. The petitioner has accused the producer of offences under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) relating to promoting enmity between groups, acts prejudicial to national integration, and deliberate acts intended to hurt religious sentiments.

The plea has also sought to implead Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, the OTT platform on which the film was released. The petitioner submitted additional documents, including an email to the platform's grievance officer and social media screenshots, alleging that the film was being projected as a factual account and used to propagate a narrative against Keralites and minority communities.

Background: Earlier Rounds of Litigation

This is not the first legal challenge the film has faced. In an earlier round of litigation, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas recused himself from hearing the matter. A Division Bench subsequently lifted an interim stay that had temporarily halted the film's release, after which earlier petitions were dismissed. Appeals filed by both the Centre and the producer were also dismissed as infructuous.

Notably, the Division Bench had left open a significant legal question raised by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and the Union government: whether private petitions challenging a film's certification on the ground that it allegedly damages a state's reputation are legally maintainable at all. That unresolved question now returns to the court through this fresh plea.

What Happens Next

The court will examine the fresh petition at a subsequent hearing, with the film continuing to be accessible via its digital release. The outcome could have broader implications for how certification challenges are treated in Indian courts, particularly for films with politically or socially contested content.