‘Udaipur Files' Director To Move Supreme Court After Delhi HC Stays Film Release
After the Delhi High Court ordered a stay on the release of Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder, director and producer Amit Jani on Thursday announced he will approach the Supreme Court to challenge the decision.
'We had screened this film for their lawyer Kapil Sibal, so even after the screening, he had to oppose it because he had taken fees for it. Today, the High Court has stayed the release of this film. We are going to the Supreme Court to challenge this decision. They have been asked to go to the Central Government and the government will give its decision within seven days whether the film is right or wrong…"
The Delhi High Court passed an interim order staying the film's release after hearing two petitions filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind and journalist Prashant Tandon. The petitioners had challenged the CBFC's decision to certify the film, citing concerns over potential communal unrest and threats to public order.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal stated, 'We provide that till the grant of interim relief is decided, there shall be a stay on the release of the film." The stay will remain in effect until the central government responds to the revision application filed under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
The film is based on the 2022 murder of Kanhaiya Lal, a tailor in Udaipur, Rajasthan, who was brutally killed on camera by two men allegedly angered by his support for former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. The incident sparked national outrage.
The petitioners argued that the movie sensationalises a deeply sensitive issue and could exacerbate communal tensions, particularly with elections approaching in several states. The film was initially scheduled for a theatrical release on July 11.
view comments
First Published:
July 11, 2025, 08:00 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Lok Sabha to take up removal motion against Justice Varma: Rijiju
The Lok Sabha will soon convene to discuss a motion seeking the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma, who is facing allegations in a corruption-related case, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said on Friday. 'We shouldn't remain in any doubt, proceedings to remove Justice Yashwant Varma will begin in the Lok Sabha,' Rijiju said, adding that all parties had agreed to move unitedly in action against alleged corruption in the judiciary. The development comes after 152 members of the Lok Sabha submitted the motion to Speaker Om Birla on July 21, the opening day of the Monsoon session of Parliament. The Rajya Sabha also received a similar notice on the same day, signed by 63 Opposition MPs. On Thursday, news agency PTI reported that a three-member inquiry committee is expected to be formed soon to probe the matter. It added that Speaker Birla is expected to approach the Chief Justice of India to recommend two individuals for the panel — one Supreme Court judge and one High Court chief justice. In addition, the Speaker will nominate a distinguished jurist of his own choosing to complete the three-member committee. Why is Justice Varma under the scanner? Justice Varma came under scrutiny after bundles of burnt and partially burnt currency were discovered at his official residence earlier this year. In response, an internal committee of judges was formed to investigate the incident. The panel later submitted a report recommending his impeachment. Justice Varma has since approached the Supreme Court, requesting that the report be set aside. On July 23, the top court stated it would form a bench to examine his petition.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
SIT records MP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah's statement in Colonel Qureshi case
Bhopal: The Special Investigation Team (SIT) has recorded the statement of Madhya Pradesh minister Kunwar Vijay Shah, two months after a case was filed against him for making offensive remarks against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, an Indian Army officer who had briefed the media on Operation Sindoor. Kunwar Vijay Shah, a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), made a remark in May that communalised Qureshi's presence at the briefings. His comments sparked public outrage (PTI) A senior police officer, requesting anonymity, said Shah was questioned by the SIT for an hour this week in Madhya Pradesh's Jabalpur, and the report will be submitted before the Supreme Court ahead of the next hearing scheduled for July 28. Shah, a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), made a remark in May that communalised Qureshi's presence at the briefings. His comments sparked public outrage. Raising questions over the delay in recording the statement, the opposition expressed concerns about the fairness of the probe, especially after Shah was seen sharing the stage with chief minister Mohan Yadav upon the latter's return from a foreign visit on July 20. 'Since May 12, the BJP-led state government has been shielding Shah. A case was registered against him on the order of the MP High Court. The police didn't arrest him for 14 days before the Supreme Court stayed his arrest. SIT didn't record his statement for two months. Now, Shah is sharing the stage with the CM — how can we expect a fair probe report? We are now looking at the apex court with hope for strict action against him,' Congress spokesperson KK Mishra said. Also Read: Operation Sindoor marks combat debut for two women colonels BJP spokesperson Durgesh Keshvani said, 'We can't speculate and comment as the matter is pending before the Supreme Court.' Shah triggered the controversy on May 12 while addressing a programme in Indore, following Operation Sindoor — India's retaliation against Pakistan for the April 22 Pahalgam terror strike. 'Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson,' he had said. Also Read:As SIT begins probe, MP minister issues fresh apology over Col Sofiya Qureshi remarks Referring to his remarks as a lapse in word choice, Shah had issued an apology — a 45-second video clip and a signed statement — on X. The top court termed the apology 'an insincere attempt to escape accountability' and ordered the state's director general of police (DGP) to constitute the SIT, calling the matter a 'litmus test' for the state government. A three-member SIT, comprising inspector general of police (Sagar zone) Pramod Verma, deputy inspector general of police (special armed force, Bhopal) Kalyan Chakraborty, and superintendent of police (Dindori district) Vahini Singh, was formed to probe further.
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
SC sends ‘Udaipur Files' movie release challenge to High Court, refuses to extend stay
New Delhi, July 25 (UNI) The Supreme Court today relegated to the Delhi High Court the petitions challenging the Central Government's order allowing the release of the movie 'Udaipur Files' subject to six further cuts, while refusing to extend the stay on the film's release. A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said it would pass an order requesting the High Court to consider the challenge to the revisional authority's order on Monday itself. The Court recorded that the producer's petition before it was withdrawn, while the accused's petition was closed with liberty to pursue the matter before the High Court. Clarifying that it had not expressed any opinion on merits, the Bench told petitioners to approach the High Court. Justice Surya Kant remarked, 'Please don't waste time here. Go to the High Court.' Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioners, urged the Court to restrain the film's release till the High Court considered their plea. However, Justice Kant refused to pass any interim order, stating, 'Meanwhile, nothing.' Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, for the producers, argued that petitioners before the High Court could not seek interim relief from the Supreme Court, particularly when the producers wanted to withdraw their petition. Referring to a similar matter involving the movie 'The Kerala Story', he said, 'I have lost twelve days already.' Justice Kant, on a lighter note, replied, 'Don't think you were in losses in these 12 days,' noting the publicity generated by the litigation. A counsel for an intervenor submitted that the petitioners' concerns were imaginary, citing no adverse consequence from earlier films like ' the Kashmir Files' and the 'Kerala Story'. He criticised the 'hyper sensitivity syndrome' of petitioners seeking to act as a 'super censor.' Bhatia added that any interim order now would cause further damage to the producers. Sibal, in response, argued that the present case was different as the petitioner had watched the film and was challenging its content, also citing the Supreme Court's hate speech judgment in Amish Devgan v. Union of India. Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the Wednesbury principle would apply when an expert body had taken a decision. (The Wednesbury principle establishes a standard for judicial review where courts can overturn decisions made by public bodies if those decisions are so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made them.) Ultimately, the Bench directed that the High Court hear the matter on Monday, reiterating that it had not expressed any view on the merits. Yesterday (July 24), the Court indicated it may remit the matter to the Delhi High Court for interim relief. During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant remarked, 'It is the right of the society to watch or not watch a movie,' and stressed that judicial officers must decide cases based strictly on evidence. Commenting on public perception, he said, 'The judiciary should remain unaffected by all this nonsense… Most of us don't read newspapers in the morning. We don't care about it.' On July 21, the Centre informed the Court it had ordered six changes to the movie. Earlier, on July 10, the Delhi High Court stayed the release of 'Udaipur Files' pending decision on pleas seeking a permanent ban over concerns of promoting disharmony. UNI SNG RN
