Gujarat High Court Lifts Stay on Netflix’s ‘Maharaj’ Film Release

On Friday, the Gujarat High Court lifted its temporary stay on releasing the Netflix film, “Maharaj.” Initially imposed on June 13, the stay was based on concerns. The film might offend the sentiments of the Pushtimargi community.

The court’s decision followed after Justice Sangeeta K Vishen viewed the film and found it rooted in historical events rather than targeting any specific community.

Court’s Decision and Reasoning on Maharaj:

Justice Vishen concluded that “Maharaj” is based on the events leading to the 1862 Maharaj Libel Case. She emphasized that the film, certified by the Central Board for Film Certification, does not intend to hurt the sentiments of the Pushtimargi community. As a result, the interim relief granted earlier was vacated, allowing Netflix to proceed with the film’s release.

Petition and Content of the Film:

The film’s release, originally scheduled for June 14, was halted after a group of businessmen petitioned the court, claiming that the film could offend the religious sensibilities of a Vaishnavite community.

“Maharaj” is inspired by Saurabh Shah’s 2013 book on the landmark 1862 libel case filed by Vaishnavite figure Jadunathji against social reformer Karsandas Mulji. Mulji’s magazine, “The Satyaprakash,” exposed sexual exploitation by the Maharaj, leading to the celebrated libel case.

Court’s Observations on the Petitioners’ Concerns on Movie Maharaj:

Justice Vishen addressed the petitioners’ concerns, stating that their grievances lacked substance. She noted that the film’s primary focus is on the social reforms advocated by Karsandas Mulji. He was the member of the Vaishnavite community.

The court emphasized that the film does not defame or insult the community but highlights the significance of social reform.

Freedom of Expression:

The court underscored the importance of freedom of expression, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.

It ruled that the petitioners’ apprehensions were speculative and could not justify restricting the film’s release. Justice Vishen pointed out that since the film had not yet been released to the public, assumptions about its impact could not curtail free expression.

Get all the latest news on Indian daily post