SC agrees to hear plea against HC order staying release of film 'Udaipur Files'
Supreme Court
on Monday agreed to hear a plea challenging the Delhi High Court's decision to stay the release of the film '
Udaipur Files
: Kanhaiya Lal tailor murder', which was scheduled to hit the screens on July 11.
After the counsel appearing for the producers sought urgent listing of the plea saying that the film's release was stayed despite the censor board certification, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said it would hear it on Wednesday or any day thereafter.
The counsel contended that the apex court had refused urgent listing of the plea seeking a stay on the film's release but the high court interfered and stayed it on July 10.
"We have spent money on the movie and obtained CBFC certification, but despite that the high court stayed its release. This is a violation of our rights," the counsel contended and sought urgent listing of the plea on Tuesday.
The bench said it would hear the plea on Wednesday or any day thereafter.
Live Events
On July 10, the Delhi High Court stayed the release of 'Udaipur Files' till the Centre decides on pleas seeking a permanent ban on the film over its potential to "promote disharmony" in society.
The high court had directed the petitioners to approach the Centre within two days with their grievance, while noting that they have not taken the recourse to approach the Central government.
The petitions, including one filed by
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind
president and Darul Uloom Deoband principal Maulana Arshad Madani before the high court, had claimed that a trailer of the movie released on June 26 was replete with dialogues and instances that had led to communal disharmony in 2022, and carries every potential to stoke the same sentiments again.
The film's producer contended before the high court that "this is a typical
India-Pakistan
plot. The petitioner has taken dialogues out of context."
The high court on July 9 directed the producers to arrange a screening of the film for the petitioners.
Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal was murdered on June 2022 allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The assailants had later released a video claiming that the murder was in reaction to the tailor allegedly sharing a social media post in support of former
BJP leader
Nupur Sharma following her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed.
The case was probed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the accused were booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, besides provisions under the Indian Penal Code.
The trial is pending before the special NIA court in Jaipur.
On July 9, the top court had refused to urgently list a plea challenging the release of 'Udaipur Files', and orally observed, "Let the film be released".
The petition before the top court was filed by Mohammed Javed, who is facing trial as the eighth accused in the case. He sought a stay on the film's release till the trial in the case is over.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Cops bust snatching syndicate; 6 arrested
New Delhi: Delhi Police has busted an inter-state mobile phone snatching and smuggling racket, arresting six individuals—including a snatcher, a receiver, a courier company employee, two West Bengal-based smugglers, and the snatcher's wife. The racket came to light on June 25 following a spate of mobile phone snatchings in east Delhi's Preet Vihar, Mandawali, and Patparganj Industrial Area. "The anti-narcotics squad reviewed over 400 CCTV clips and identified Salman (37), a habitual offender from New Usmanpur. He was arrested along with the scooty used in at least six reported snatching cases," said DCP (East) Abhishek Dhania. During interrogation, Salman revealed that he would hand over the stolen phones to Shafi Ahmad alias Teepu, who in turn routed them through Bhupendra, an employee at a courier company. Bhupendra confessed to sending the devices to Malda, West Bengal, in exchange for a commission. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi A police team then travelled to Malda and apprehended two more suspects—Mohammad Rehman Sekh (35) and Emarul Kayues (36)—who admitted to smuggling the stolen phones into Bangladesh. Police recovered 27 stolen mobile phones from their possession. The financial trail led investigators to Salman's wife, Gulbahar (37), who was found receiving payments from the illegal phone transactions into her bank account. tnn
The Print
32 minutes ago
- The Print
10 convicts from Jharkhand, including 6 on death row, move SC over long-pending verdict on appeals
Monday, a bench led by Justice Surya Kant took serious note of the petition and issued a notice to the Jharkhand HC for its response. According to the petition, jointly filed by the convicts, verdicts in eight cases were reserved more than three years ago. Judgments in the remaining two have not been pronounced despite a lapse of 2-3 years. New Delhi: Ten convicts from Jharkhand, including six who are on death row, have moved the Supreme Court, complaining against the delayed disposal of their appeals by the state HC. The petition raises important questions regarding convicts' rights to personal liberty and procedural fairness under the criminal justice system. It argues that convicts too have the right to live with dignity under the Constitution. Prolonged delay in disposal of their appeals is antithetical to Constitutional as well as statutory rights. Incidentally, this is the second time that convicts from Jharkhand have sought the top court's intervention in pending verdicts on their appeals filed against trial court decisions. In the previous round, four convicts had filed writ petitions under Article 32—a remedy under the Constitution to move the top court directly for enforcement of a fundamental right. Subsequent to the apex court's notice, the HC had delivered its verdict for all four, resulting in acquittal in three cases. In the fourth case, the HC had referred the case to a third judge due to a difference of opinion between the two judges. Nonetheless, the convict in the fourth case was released on bail immediately. Taking note of the inordinate delay on the part of the state HC, Justice Kant's bench had asked its registrar general for a detailed report on the status of such cases, if any. Notably, all the 14 cases that have reached the top court were heard by a division bench of two judges. As per the Jharkhand HC website, Justice Rongon Mukopadhyay led the two-judges bench that heard and then reserved the verdict in these matters. Only the junior judges were different. Justice Mukopadhyay also heads the High Court Services Legal Committee—a legal aid body that provides free legal services to marginalised sections of the society. Three of six death row convicts, who filed their appeals in the HC in 2018, are facing death sentence in rape cases. One of the 10 petitioners has been in jail for more than 16 years and had filed his appeal in the HC in 2013. Six have been in jail for more than a decade, with two having spent more than 15 years behind bars. The remaining three have been in jail for 6 to 8 years now. The petitioners, who moved their petition through the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC), were represented in the top court by advocate Fauzia Shakil. Before moving the SC, the petitioners and their families repeatedly raised the issue of delayed verdicts with multiple authorities, including the Chief Justice of the HC. They also wrote to the Chief Minister's office and legal aid bodies such as NALSA, state as well as district legal services authority. The delay is not just a procedural violation, but a breach of a statutory mandate too. The petition pointed out that as per the Jharkhand HC rules, a judgment should ordinarily be pronounced within six weeks of the conclusion of arguments. If not pronounced within three months of the conclusion of the arguments, the Chief Justice may either post the case for delivering the judgment in an open court or withdraw and post it for disposal before an appropriate bench. In terms of the statutory mandate, the rape appeals ought to have been disposed of within six months of the filing of the appeal. Under the Criminal Law (Amendment Act), 2018, which came into effect on 21 April 2018, with the insertion of sub-section (4) in section 376 of the erstwhile Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc), an appeal filed against the sentence imposed under the rape law must be disposed of within six months from the date of filing of an appeal. The petition is also an attempt to seek correction of earlier Supreme Court judgments that have given relief to death row convicts only when there is delay on the part of the President or Governor in deciding mercy petitions, observing inordinate delay in the execution of death sentence causes mentally agony. Ironically, these judgments have excluded the impact of protracted delays in judicial proceedings, such as confirmation of death sentences or adjudication of criminal appeals, on a convict's mental health and dignity. Courts have criticised the executives—President and Governor—for their inexplicable delay in deciding mercy petitions of death row convicts while commuting them to life sentences, but have refrained from taking into account the judicial impasse that has forced prisoners to remain incarcerated for prolonged periods. Rather, judicial decisions have held that a convict is not under immediate threat of execution when his/her appeal is a subject of judicial consideration, meaning pendency of their case in a court does not affect them psychologically. 'It is further submitted that mere availability of judicial remedies does not eliminate the mental anguish; in fact, protracted delays in judicial proceedings exacerbate the suffering, as the convict is kept in a state of suspended animation—neither assured of life nor facing immediate execution,' the petition has submitted. 'It is respectfully submitted that the pendency of death sentence confirmation hearings or criminal appeals, particularly in cases involving capital punishment, is not a period of calm or relief. Rather, it is a period of uncertainty and anxiety. The convict remains incarcerated under the shadow of a potential execution despite the existence of legal remedies,' it added. Delay in pronouncement of judgments is not just a violation of the right under Article 21, but is a crucial factor for suspension of the sentence, the petition has argued. (Edited by Viny Mishra) Also read: Why Supreme Court hasn't confirmed a single death sentence in the last two years
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Police reveal details of plane crash at London Southend Airport that killed 4 foreign nationals - The Economic Times Video
A small medical plane crashed moments after takeoff at London's Southend Airport on Sunday, erupting into a fireball and killing all four foreign nationals onboard. Operated by Dutch-based Zeusch Aviation, the aircraft had flown from Athens and was headed to Lelystad. The airport has been shut down as investigators probe the cause. Dramatic footage shows thick smoke engulfing the crash site. Essex Police confirmed it was a 'serious incident' and that inquiries are ongoing.
