Why can't a heroine in a film fighting for justice be named Janaki, asks Kerala HC
Noting that the protagonist, named Janaki, is a victim of sexual assault seeking justice in court of law, the High Court orally pointed out that "she is not a rapist. If a rapist is named as Rama, Krishna, Janaki, then I can understand. At least we can appreciate that you should not name that character with God's name. Here, she is a heroine of the film, fighting for the cause of justice".
Film production company Cosmos Entertainments had, last Wednesday (June 25), approached the Kerala High Court alleging unreasonable delay by the CBFC in granting the censor certificate to Gopi's film.
The film was to have been released on June 27 but with the CBFC opposing 'Janaki' in the title, it's been held up and on Monday, the Deputy Solicitor General, appearing for the CBFC, submitted that the current title of the film violates guidelines issued by the Central government, pursuant to Section 5B(2) of the Cinematograph Act.
But the court, however, found the argument prima facie unsustainable and orally pointed out that in India, most of the names are attributed to God, whether it is Hindus, Christians, or Muslims.
"80 per cent of names have religious connotations, like Ahammed, Anthony, Kesavan, Krishnan...you (CBFC) cannot dictate to the directors and artistes which name should be given or which story should be told. That is the freedom of an artiste. You cannot interfere with that. It is not absolute, but you do not have a convincing reason to say how this name Janaki will be contemptuous to racial, religious or other groups," it stated.
While posting the case for Wednesday, the court orally directed the DSG to file a detailed statement so as to give a clear picture as to why the name 'Janaki' cannot be used in the film.
In a related development, on Monday, representatives belonging to the various Malayalam film bodies, including the FEFKA, the AMMA, and the ATMA (the body of those in the television industry), staged a protest before the CBFC regional office in the state capital.
Popular director Shaji Kailas, who has directed numerous memorable films, said it's strange that needless controversies are being created.
"If this is the case with regard to a name, then my name also should be changed. Really fail to gauge what the problem is with the CBFC," said Kailas.
Renjith, producer of the blockbuster film "Thudarum", starring superstar Mohanlal and presently running to packed houses, said: 'It's not just those associated with the film industry who should protest, the people at large should join in to protest against this highhandedness."
Jayan Cherthala, Vice President in the adhoc committee of the Association of Malayalam Movie Artistes, said if we are going to allow this irrational attitude, then there will be no end to this unnecessary interference.
"No one should forget that the poster and the teaser of this film have been cleared and have been released for a while now. This is in no way acceptable," said Cherthala.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
Delhi Court orders complaint against woman who filed false rape case to extort money
New Delhi [India], July 4 (ANI): Delhi's Tis Hazari court has ordered to file a complaint against the woman who lodged a false rape case to extort the money from the accused. While acquitting the accused, the court noted that the woman met the man on a matrimonial website. She framed the accused on the pretext of a marital alliance. The court referred to the lines of American criminal defense attorney F. Lee Bailey, 'In court, the truth is often lost in the process. The oath is meant to protect it, but men lie, even under God.' 'The above adage squarely applies to the case herein, as we would see while I pen out this judgment,' the court said at the outset. Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Anuj Agrawal acquitted the accused and ordered a complaint against the woman for perjury for making false statements before the court. The court said, ' An acquittal would not serve the interest of justice, as the law must not only punish the guilty but also protect the dignity of an innocent.' ' It is evident from the record that the prosecutrix lied under oath, destroying the trust on which justice stands,' ASJ Agarwal pointed out in the judgment passed on July 2. He directed to send a complaint against her for offences of perjury be sent to the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Central). As per the prosecution, the woman and the accused met on a matrimonial website in 2021. The accused started chatting with her. It was alleged that the accused met her first time in September 2021 and sexually molested her in his car. He allegedly took her nude pics with his mobile. Upon her protest, the accused promised to marry her and also promised to delete her photographs in the next meeting. It was also alleged that accused met her on her flat in October 14, 2021 where he committed forced vaginal and anal intercourse with her. He again took pics of her. Ironically, these photos were not recovered during forensic examination from the mobile phone of the accused. The court observed that her testimony is not only marred by contradictions but is inherently inconsistent, tainted, and full of concoctions. ' False rape accusations not only put unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets but also cause grave injustice to actual rape victims,' ASJ said in the judgement. After investigation police filed a charge sheet and stated that the woman had filed 4 cases of rape against other persons also. The judge said that an acquittal simpliciter would not subserve the interest of justice as the Law must not only punish the guilty- it must also protect the dignity of an innocent. ' The gravel has fallen in favour of the accused, but the echo of accusation lingers for society remembers the charge and not the verdict as in our social milieu, a false accusation of rape/sexual assault, leaves an indelible impression upon the social psyche which no judicial imprimatur can remove,' the court said. The court also noted that the accused was arrested even before registration of the FIR. A police official and investigation officer were in regular contact with the prosecutrix even before the registration of the FIR. ' It is clear that the personal liberty of the accused was curtailed (amounting to arrest in the eyes of law) the moment he was detained from his house by police officials,' the judge said. The judge pointed out that a police official had telephonic conversations with her 16-17 times between September 18 to October 24, 2021. The court said that the contention of the defence that concerned police officials were in 'cahoots'' with the prosecutrix so that they could extort money from the accused, cannot be brushed aside lightly. However, any action on this count is left to the Administrative discretion of a worthy Commissioner of Delhi Police who may, in his wisdom, look into the matter and take appropriate remedial action so that the cherished motto of Delhi Police Force 'shanti, seva, nyay' does not get belied, the court said in the judgement. (ANI)
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Donald Trump set to launch America's 250th birthday bash in Iowa heartland
President Trump is all set to launch America's yearlong 250th birthday celebration Thursday at Iowa's State Fairgrounds, a location rich with political meaning for him. This spot hosted his first 2015 campaign helicopter arrival and 2023 rally, cementing Iowa's role in his rise. Organizers chose Iowa as "America's heartland" to symbolize national unity, though the state backed Trump in the elections always. The event featured Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA," fireworks, and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins alongside Homeland Security's Kristi Noem. Trump timed it perfectly: Hours earlier, the House narrowly passed his $3.4 trillion tax-and-spending bill, letting him tout policy wins before cheering crowds. America250 organizers hope the festivities bridge America's deep divides, but face steep challenges. Recent polls reveal a massive patriotism gap: 90% of Republicans say they're "proud to be American" versus just 33% of Democrats. Trump's approval rating sits at 40% amid criticism of his policies, including June's military parade that most Americans deemed wasteful. Even celebration funding is contentious: Federal humanities grants were cut, forcing cancellations of local programs like Declaration of Independence readings in Illinois. Iowa Democrats protested Trump's visit, warning his new law's Medicaid cuts will "devastate rural hospitals" and create "longer waits for care" . State fairgrounds fences separated supporters from protesters during the event. While Iowa launches the festivities, the main "Great American State Fair" will unfold on Washington's National Mall in 2026 with pavilions from all 50 states. Trump first pitched this fair during his 2023 campaign, envisioning it in Iowa, but planners shifted it to the capital for broader impact. Yearlong events include student contests answering "What does America mean to you?", a traveling tech exhibit, and a national time capsule buried in Philadelphia. Despite nonpartisan origins, Trump allies now dominate the planning commission, including producers of his rallies and a former "Stop the Steal" organizer. Conservative groups like PragerU are creating educational materials, prompting concerns about ideological framing of history. As fireworks lit the Iowa sky, the question remained: Can this celebration unite a nation where even pride in country splits along party lines?
The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
Why Union Minister Suresh Gopi-starrer ‘Janaki' is in censor board's crosshairs
Ironically, the notice was sent to the film makers on the day the movie was scheduled for a world-wide release. In a show cause notice dated 27 June, issued to the makers of Malayalam feature film JSK–Janaki v/s State of Kerala, the Board asked them to change the name of the lead character 'Janaki' in the title and dialogues, or wherever it occurs in the movie. The objection is under Clauses 2(xii) and 6 of the Guidelines for certification of Films of Public Exhibition. New Delhi: The word 'Janaki' is provocative, vulgar, offensive and contemptuous of race and religion. Or so the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) thinks. To make matters worse, the Board's notice gave liberty to the production company to appeal against the former's order before a tribunal that has been abolished. The notice said the company, if aggrieved by its order, can move the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) within 30 days. However, with the notification of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, FCAT no longer exists. In Hindu mythology, 'Janaki' specifically refers to Sita, the wife of Lord Ram. The notice has now been challenged in the Kerala High Court, where the film producer has claimed that the Board's move is not just discriminatory, but also lacks consistency. In the writ petition filed before the HC, the producer—Cosmos Entertainment—claimed that many films with the word 'Janaki' in the title have been released in the past, with CBFC's clearance. Besides, films with titles or lead characters with names referencing other Hindu figures too have been screened without any objection from the Board, the petition claims. Therefore, the Board's move to block JSK—Janaki v/s State of Kerala—amounts to selective targeting and demonstrates non-application of mind, which is an arbitrary exercise of power, says the petition. The petition further asserts that the continued use of the name 'Janaki' in Indian cinema underscores that it is not intrinsically offensive or controversial. During a hearing Tuesday, the Kerala HC bench of Justice N. Nagaresh accepted the production company's suggestion to view the film before deciding on the petition. The film shall be screened for him on 7 July at 10 am at Lal Media, Palarivattom. Though the CBFC has officially not given reasons for the show cause notice it issued to the production company, before the court its lawyer had contended that the character 'Janaki' in the film is sexually assaulted. Speaking to ThePrint, the production company's advocate Anand Menon said that the objection came as a surprise to his client. 'When the movie was previewed in Trivandrum, the board's representatives orally told the production company that the movie would receive a UA 13+ certificate for its release,' he said. Also the Board's examining committee had cleared the movie. Sub-clause 12 of Clause 2 of the said guidelines provides that the Board shall ensure that the visuals or words that are contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups are not presented. Clause 6 authorises the Board to scrutinise the titles of the films carefully and ensure they are not provocative, vulgar, offensive or violative of any other guidelines. CBFC derives these delegated powers from sections 5B(1) and 5B(2) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 that enumerates guiding principles to certify films. Under section 5B(1), the Board can decline to certify a film for public exhibition if the film or any part of it is against the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with a foreign State, public order, decency or morality, or involves defamation or contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of offence. The Guidelines for Certification of Films of Public Exhibition, which have been invoked to raise objection against JSK—Janaki v/s State of Kerala, have been issued by the Centre under section 5B(2) of the Act. This provision says the Centre can set out principles that will guide the competent authority to clear the film for release Significantly, the production company's advocate Anand Menon said that the Board has not recommended any other cuts or modifications, which indicate that the film, otherwise, satisfies the statutory certification standards. 'The refusal to certify the film solely on the basis of a fictional name reflects an excessive, unreasonable and disproportionate exercise of discretion,' he said. As per the petition in the HC, the CBFC had on 28 March issued a teaser certificate to the film without any objections. On 18 June, the film was screened before the CBFC's examination committee. When the production house did not receive any feedback from CBFC, it moved a petition in HC, seeking its intervention in light of the inaction and delay on the Board's part in issuing the censor certificate. During a hearing of this petition on 25 June, the Board told the HC it had constituted a revising committee to view the film and that it would file its report before the court. Two days later, however, the movie producer received the show-cause notice, objecting to the film's name. According to the production house, the film is slated for theatrical release in 21 countries and any disruption now will result in escalated logistics and distribution costs. The direction to change the name 'Janaki' in the title and dialogues at this belated stage will impose an unreasonable and disproportionate burden on the film's producers as implementing the change would require extensive re-dubbing by at least 16 voice artists, the petition points out. This will be 'commercially catastrophic, operationally impracticable and manifestly arbitrary,' the petition has said. Lead actor Suresh Gopi would alone have to re-dub over 96 instances where the name 'Janaki' appears. This is likely to take 15 days, whereas the film is scheduled to release in five languages and corresponding re-dubbing in all those languages would also be necessitated. CBFC's objection also threatens to disrupt the movie's release on OTT platforms since the contractual terms require the production company to hand over the final cut of the film by 30 July. (Edited by Viny Mishra) Also read: 127 cuts for Punjab '95 shows institutional paranoia
