Shah Bano’s daughter, Siddiqua Begum Khan, has approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking to restrain the release of Emraan Hashmi and Yami Gautam’s film ‘Haq’, alleging it exploits her late mother’s personal life for commercial gain.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
INDORE: The daughter of Shah Bano Begum, whose landmark legal battle in the 1980s led to a historic Supreme Court ruling on maintenance rights for divorced Muslim women, has approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking to stop the release of the upcoming film ‘Haq’.
The petition, filed by Siddiqua Begum Khan against the Union of India and the film’s makers, alleges that the movie, starring Emraan Hashmi and Yami Gautam, distorts real-life events and commercially exploits her late mother’s personal story without consent. The film is scheduled for release on November 7.
What Petition Claims
In her plea, Siddiqua Begum Khan asserts that ‘Haq’ uses her mother’s name and life story without approval, thereby violating the family’s privacy and dignity. She argues that Shah Bano’s personal and marital life has been turned into cinematic entertainment, causing “emotional trauma” and “irreparable reputational damage” to her family.
“Portraying Shah Bano’s private marital life as cinematic entertainment converts human suffering into a commercial commodity, contrary to constitutional morality,”
the petition reads.
Khan further claims that she has inherited her mother’s moral and personality rights, which would be infringed if the film is allowed to be released without consent.
Court Asks Filmmakers to Submit Disclaimer
Justice Pranay Verma, presiding at the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, briefly heard the matter on Monday.
During the hearing, counsel for Junglee Films, one of the producers, stated that the film is “fictional in nature” and carries a standard disclaimer clarifying that it is not a biopic.
The judge asked whether the disclaimer explicitly declares the movie to be fictional.
When the filmmakers’ counsel confirmed it does, Justice Verma directed:
“Bring it on record, this disclaimer.”
The court has sought the submission of the disclaimer and will continue hearing the case tomorrow.
Arguments from Both Sides
Siddiqua Begum’s counsel emphasized that the objection is not against the portrayal of the Supreme Court judgment itself, since that is a matter of public record, but against how the film dramatizes Shah Bano’s personal life.
“Only Shah Bano and her daughters know what she actually went through,”
the lawyer argued, adding that the filmmakers could have avoided controversy by seeking the family’s consent.
The filmmakers, on the other hand, maintain that ‘Haq’ is only “inspired by the Shah Bano case” and not a direct retelling of her life. They noted that the teaser and trailer promote the movie as the story of a “Bharat ki Beti” and that it carries a disclaimer indicating it is a fictionalized adaptation.
Justice Verma also observed that much of the Shah Bano case is already part of the public domain through the Supreme Court’s 1985 judgment, suggesting that not all references may amount to a privacy violation.
CBFC’s Stand on Certification
The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), which had cleared the film for release, told the court that it treated ‘Haq’ as a work of fiction. Hence, no consent from Shah Bano’s heirs was required prior to certification.
However, the petitioner argues that the CBFC failed in its statutory duty by certifying the film without verifying its real-life references.
“The CBFC’s failure to ensure consent from legal heirs before certifying ‘Haq’ constitutes statutory dereliction and constitutional abdication,”
Siddiqua’s plea states.
Background: The Shah Bano Case
The Shah Bano Begum vs. Mohammad Ahmad Khan case (1985) remains one of the most significant judgments in Indian legal history. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of granting maintenance to divorced Muslim women under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), a decision that sparked national debate on the Uniform Civil Code and led to legislative changes through the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
ALSO READ: Justice System Must Stand Firmly With Every Woman: CJI-Designate Surya Kant
The High Court has asked the film’s producers to submit the disclaimer for review. The matter will be heard further on Tuesday.