'HAQ', starring Emraan Hashmi and Yami Gautam, has cleared censorship requirements across India, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom ahead of its theatrical release on November 7. The film received certification without any cuts from all boards, raising interest in its exploration of family, religion, justice, and gender equality. However, the release comes amidst objections and legal action from the family of Shah Bano, on whose life the story is based.
'HAQ' has been certified U/A 13+ in India, PG-15 in the UAE, and PG in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. The film is produced by Junglee Pictures and directed by Suparn Verma. The narrative draws from the widely discussed Supreme Court judgment in the Mohd Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Begum case of the 1980s, touching on sensitive themes such as the Uniform Civil Code, personal laws, and gender rights.
The film centres on Shah Bano, a mother who approached the courts in 1985 seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for herself and her children. The Supreme Court's decision at the time led to significant public and political debate, influencing discourse around equal access to justice and the intersection of religious and secular laws in India.
Despite having completed all formalities for release, the certification process has not put an end to controversy. Shah Bano’s family has criticised the producers, alleging that the film depicts her life story without the family’s approval or authorisation. The concerns have led the family to take legal steps to challenge the movie’s release.
The cast of 'HAQ' includes Yami Gautam, who portrays a character based on Shah Bano, alongside Emraan Hashmi, Vartika Singh in her debut role, and actors Sheeba Chaddha, Danish Hussain, and Aseem Hattangady.
Delhi HC refuses to hear PIL against 'The Taj Story'Delhi High Court has refused to urgently hear a public interest litigation (PIL) filed against the film's release and its certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). The bench observed that there was no immediate need for an urgent hearing and therefore declined to list the matter for early consideration. The petitioner, advocate Shakeel Abbas, had requested the court to stay the film's release and cancel the CBFC certificate granted to it. In his plea, Abbas argued that the movie distorts historical facts and could potentially disrupt communal harmony. |
