Pleas against ‘The Kerala Story 2’ premature, misconceived: producer tells Kerala HC

The producer of The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond has told the Kerala High Court that the pleas opposing the film’s release were “premature, misconceived and not maintainable.”

The submission was made by the film’s producer Vipul Amrutlal Shah in an affidavit filed in the High Court on Tuesday (February 24, 2026).

On Wednesday, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas said he would hear the petitions in detail at 3 pm.

Mr. Shah, in his affidavit, has also contended that the censor board, Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), was the sole expert authority constituted under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, to examine films in their entirety and certify them for public exhibition.

“The supervisory jurisdiction of this court does not extend to substituting its own assessment of a film’s content for the expert judgment of the certifying authority,” he said in his affidavit.

He has also denied the allegations in the pleas against the movie and termed them as “an abuse and misuse of the process of law”.

Referring to the plea by the first petitioner – Sreedev Namboodiri of Kannavam in Kannur district – Mr. Shah has claimed that it was filed “with a malafide intention and an ulterior motive to gain financial benefits from him”.

The producer has said that the teasers of the film were released 16 days before the filing of the plea.

He has also said that exhibition of a certified film cannot be restrained on the basis of a two-minute teaser alone, without any examination of the complete film.

He has also said that granting prior restraint at the threshold without examining the complete film, without any prima facie finding of legal infirmity in the CBFC’s decision, and on the basis of a teaser “would be to visit catastrophic and irreversible economic harm upon the respondent (producer), thousands of exhibitors, and distribution partners across the country”.

“The said film is slated to release in over 1,800 theatres across India as well as overseas,” Mr. Shah claimed.

Regarding the film’s title, he has said the qualifier ‘Goes Beyond’ in the film’s name was “not decorative”.

“It is a deliberate and conspicuous textual signal, prominently displayed in the teaser at multiple timestamps, that the film’s narrative extends beyond the geography of Kerala. The definite article ‘The’ in the title is a reference to the first film in the franchise and does not restrict the film’s subject matter to Kerala alone,” the affidavit has claimed.

He also said that if there was an apprehension of mob action or protest affecting public order, it was for the state to take steps to prevent the same and cannot result in stopping the release of a film.

“A scenario where any individual or group can effectively veto the exhibition of a certified film simply by threatening disorder would render meaningless both the CBFC certification process and the constitutional guarantee of free expression,” the affidavit said.

The court had on Tuesday orally observed that the teaser and trailers of the movie depicts a State like Kerala where “everyone lives in communal harmony in a wrong light.”

The court had also observed that using the State’s name and claiming the film is based on facts can lead to communal tensions in the State.

The three separate pleas have sought to quash the certificate for public viewing granted to the film, which is scheduled to be released on February 27.