The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a writ petition seeking a ban on or change in the title of the upcoming film “Yadav Ji ki Love Story,” holding that the name does not portray the Yadav community in a negative light and does not attract any of the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan rejected the plea filed by the chief of the Vishwa Yadav Parishad after examining the material on record.
The petitioner contended that the title of the film created an offensive stereotype and reflected the Yadav community in a poor light. Concerns were also raised regarding the portrayal of the female lead, with the petitioner’s counsel submitting that although there was no objection to inter-community marriages, the depiction of the woman was unacceptable.
“A lady cannot be publicised this way,” the counsel argued, adding that the film claimed to be based on a true story.
The bench found the apprehensions to be without merit. Justice Nagarathna observed:
“We fail to understand as to how the title of a film can reflect the community in a bad light. The title of the film nowhere has any adjective or any word that portrays the Yadav community in bad light.”
The Court held that the challenge was based solely on the title and that no material had been shown to demonstrate any derogatory reference to the community.
The bench termed the petitioner’s concerns as “wholly unfounded” and clarified that the film was a work of fiction.
The Court distinguished its earlier direction in a separate matter relating to the film “Ghooskhor Pandat,” where the producer had been asked to change the title. It noted that the term “ghooskhor” meant “corrupt,” thereby attaching a negative connotation to a community.
“In the instant case no such negativity is attached to the Yadav community,” the Court observed.
The bench held that none of the grounds for reasonable restrictions on free speech under Article 19(2) were made out. It concluded that the title did not portray the community “in bad light or any negative way.”
Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
