On Thursday, the Delhi High Court declined to consider a petition aimed at preventing the release of the forthcoming film The Taj Story. The petitioner argued that the movie misrepresents historical events and could threaten communal harmony.
A panel consisting of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela reviewed the petition submitted by advocate Shakeel Abbas. The court inquired why the petitioner had not pursued a revision application with the Central government to contest the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) approval.
The court also questioned the inclusion of actor Paresh Rawal as a respondent in the case, asking, “What accountability does an actor have regarding the film’s content?”
In light of these inquiries, the petitioner opted to withdraw the case.
The petition contended that The Taj Story inaccurately depicts historical facts, which could lead to communal unrest. The film, directed and penned by Tushar Amrish Goel and produced by Suresh Jha, stars Paresh Rawal, Zakir Hussain, Amruta Khanvilkar, Namit Das, and Sneha Wagh.
This controversy arises just days ahead of the film’s planned release on October 31.
COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO I&B MINISTRY, CBFC
In a separate development, Dr. Rajneesh Singh, a researcher from Ayodhya and BJP leader, has lodged a complaint with the Information and Broadcasting Ministry as well as the CBFC, requesting a halt to The Taj Story’s release. Singh claimed that the film is based on his 2022 public interest litigation (PIL) submitted to the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, which aimed to open 22 sealed rooms in the Taj Mahal to verify historical claims.
In his correspondence dated October 27, Singh alleged that the filmmakers utilized elements from his PIL without authorization and presented them inaccurately. “My intention in filing the PIL was to promote historical clarity, but the film has commercialized and distorted those aspects,” he stated. Singh has urged the CBFC and the ministry to delay the film’s certification and public release until a thorough investigation is conducted.
The 2022 PIL, which was considered by Justices DK Upadhyaya and Subhash Vidyarthi, was dismissed by the Lucknow Bench. Nevertheless, Singh asserts that the film’s plot, dialogues, and courtroom sequences closely resemble his original petition, representing an unauthorized appropriation of his intellectual property.