Consider ‘Sentiments’ Of Mothers Seeking Stay On Release Of ‘Faraaz’ Movie, Try To Resolve Dispute: Delhi High Court To Filmmaker Hansal Mehta

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday asked Bollywood filmmaker Hansal Mehta and two women, who lost their daughters in a 2016 terrorist attack in a Dhaka cafe, to sit together and try to resolve the issue pertaining to the film 'Faraaz'.

A division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Talwant Singh was hearing an application moved by the women seeking stay on the release of the movie, claiming right to privacy qua their deceased daughters. The film based on the Dhaka attack is scheduled to be released on February 03.

“We can ask them to sit with you and work this out. We don’t know if the law permits us to injunct release of the film. The court can always ask you to be sensitive. You can’t profit…somebody’s misery you should not profit from. It is the statement of how right minded people should conduct themselves. Please sit together,” the court told counsel appearing for the filmmaker.

The movie is based on the terrorist attack that happened on July 1, 2016 at Holey Artisan, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

The women have challenged an order passed by a single judge in October last year which refused to grant interim relief against release of the movie. The single judge had observed that the right to privacy is essentially a right in personam and is not inheritable by the mothers or legal heirs of the deceased persons.

During the hearing today before the division bench, Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal appearing for the women submitted that the filmmakers approached the issue with “complete insensitivity”, adding that no consent was taken from them before making the movie.

“They even refused to allow us to view the movie before the single bench. The single judge holds that since the girls are now deceased, there can be no right to privacy in relation to their rights. This is a wrong preposition,” Sibal said.

He further apprised the court that after the movie was screened in England at London Film Festival, an affidavit has been filed by a person who was able to watch the movie.

“The issue is whether the family members and the mothers who are alive, whether they have the right to privacy in relation to their daughters. For example, there is a sexual orientation broadcast of an individual after their life and a member of the family says that 'no you can’t do this'. Will it be free to all? So here the added issue is the manner in which they lost their lives, which is very violent means," Sibal submitted.

As the bench said that the incident must be in public domain already, Sibal submitted that the nature of the medium and the impact it has, is to be seen, and that the mothers have the right to be left alone.

“They don’t want the broadcast, they don’t want spotlight. These are not celebrities, these are private persons who are grieving,” he said.

Responding to the contention, Justice Mridul orally remarked:

“What is the law with respect of freedom of speech? Show us any movie which is injuncted on this ground. Any movie. There have been such attacks in which….in every case…we don’t know a single case which is not made into a film. People like sensational movies. People like movies based on real incidents.”

He added: “Not a single holocaust that mankind has ever experienced has not been put on celluloid. What do you do?”

Sibal submitted that while the filmmakers have said that they have given a disclaimer in the movie stating that it is a work of fiction, they gave statements to the media that the film is based on true events.

“They cannot release the film without my consent. That is the right to be left alone that will triumph,” he submitted.

Emphasising that the right to privacy relates to the issues that take place within confines of a home, Justice Mridul said: “Where you have…it's voyeuristic when someone informs the world about what’s happening inside your house. This incident occurred in public view. There must be so much coverage of the incident and there is so much coverage of such incidents unfortunately on a regular basis.”

The bench also told the filmmaker’s counsel: “There is no harm in talking to them. We are not talking about rights, but the sentiments of a mother. Talk to her. All that we are asking is for you to do is to try and resolve this by putting heads together if you can. You should.”

The court listed the matter for hearing on January 24.

Title: RUBA AHMED & ANR. v. HANSAL MEHTA & ORS.