"Privacy not a heritable right", Madhya Pradesh HC refuses plea by Shah Bano Begum's daughter to stop release of film 'Haq'

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused a petition seeking to restrain the releasing, screening, promoting or publishing the film "Haq" or any derivative thereof. 

Yami Gautam Dhar-Emraan Hashmi starrer film is ‘inspired by’ the Shah Bano case where 1985, in a landmark Supreme Court judgement upholding the rights of divorced Muslim women, ordering a steady sum of maintenance not only as responsibility but humanity. The film is slated for release on 7th November 2025.

Daughter and surviving legal heir of Shah Bano Begum had approached the High Court against the release of motion picture "Haq" saying it explicitly dramatizes the personal and matrimonial life of her late parents without her knowledge or consent. 

The High Court noted that since Shah Bano is no longer alive, her right of privacy and reputation has come to an end with her. "It is not the case of the petitioner that the film has in any manner violated her own privacy or reputation in any manner. Thus, the contention that the film violates the right of privacy or reputation of Smt. Shah Bano is not acceptable...the right of privacy is not a heritable right and such right of Smt. Shah Bano has not been inherited by the petitioner and there is no question of violation of the same and furthermore, no violation of her individual right of privacy has been alleged by the petitioner hence it cannot be said that the petition is in respect of violation of any fundamental rights attracting Article 19 or 21 of the Constitution of India.", the bench of Justice Pranay Verma has said.

High Court also relied on the disclaimer which states that the film is dramatized and fictionalized adaptation of the English book titled "Bano: Bharat ki Beti" written by Jigna Vora and is inspired by the 1985 landmark judgment.

"Since the film is an inspiration and a fiction, some amount of leeway is certainly permissible and merely because the same is done, it cannot be said that there has been any sensationalization or false portrayal. The narrative does not claim to be true hence to contend that the same distorts personalities and private lives of individuals is unacceptable. The contention that the script/dialogues are fabricated and not drawn from any legitimate or judicial source also cannot be accepted since the movie does not claim to be a true story of any individual", the bench noted.

Court has also said that once a matter becomes a matter of public record, the right of privacy no longer subsists and it becomes a legitimate subject for comment by the Press and Media amongst others. 

On the aspect of delay, the bench noted that after release of the teaser no steps were taken by the petitioner in respect of grant of Certificate for the film. "At least a month ago, cause of action for the petitioner to approach this Court had accrued but she waited for a considerable period of time for preferring this petition. Her conduct is hence not that of a vigilant litigant. The petition hence also suffers from delay and latches", the high court has added.

Case Title: MS. SIDDIQUA BEGUM KHAN vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Judgment Date: November 4, 2025

Bench: Justice Pranay Verma