Udaipur Files ‘Crime-Focused, Not Community-Targeted’: SG Tushar Mehta Defends Film’s Release in Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday heard petitions related to the film Udaipur Files, whose theatrical release was stayed by the Delhi High Court days before its scheduled launch.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union of India, strongly defended the film’s release, stating it was “crime-focused, not community-targeted” and had undergone substantial modifications in line with certification norms.
The matter was heard by the Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for the producers, submitted that all objections flagged by the Centre’s Revision Committee had been addressed. He read from the Committee’s order and informed the Court that 55 cuts and revised disclaimers had been implemented, removing provocative dialogues and references to specific communities or locations.
SG Mehta elaborated on the process followed by the certification authority and highlighted that the Ministry of External Affairs was also consulted. “Terrorism is a global issue. There is nothing in the film that threatens foreign relations or offends any community. The narrative is balanced, includes positive characters, and has disclaimers stating it is a fictionalized account inspired by real events,” he said.
Mehta told the Court that 13 minutes of footage had been cut and generic language was now used throughout. “The dialogues are now non-specific. The disclaimers are clear. There’s no contempt, and the CBFC process has been duly followed,” he stressed.
Opposing the release, Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal (for Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind) and Menaka Guruswamy (for accused Mohd Javed) argued that the film mirrored the chargesheet and inflamed communal sentiments under the garb of free speech.
Sibal said, “Free speech is not hate speech,” and urged the Court to consider the impact on community harmony.
Justice Surya Kant assured that judicial decisions are made independently and not under public pressure. “If judges were to give in to blackmail or noise, we couldn’t function a single day,” he remarked.
Responding to Guruswamy’s concern over societal prejudice, Justice Kant said courts must remain immune to public sentiment. “Most of us don’t even read the morning newspaper. We go only by the material on record,” he added.
Bhatia pointed out that the film made no mention of Mohd Javed, the accused, and accused him of obstructing release through “false affidavits.” He submitted that the required changes had already been made and sought immediate lifting of the stay.
The Court clarified that Bhatia’s Special Leave Petition (SLP) had become infructuous and that the larger constitutional challenge by Sibal would proceed through a writ petition. T
The matter will be taken up briefly on Friday (July 25).
Notably, on July 21, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central Government had informed the Bench that orders had already been passed in the revision petition. "A step more would be infringing upon that process, is my personal opinion" he cautioned. On July 16, the Court had deferred hearing on pleas, it decided to wait for the outcome of ongoing proceedings before the Central Government on a revision petition under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act.
Interestingly, on July 15, the Supreme Court had agreed to hear on July 16, a petition filed by an accused Mohammad Javed, in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case seeking stay on release of movie “The Udaipur Files: Kanhaiyalal Tailor Murder”, and on July 14, the Supreme Court had agreed to list a plea challenging the Delhi High Court’s interim stay order.
Earlier, on July 9, the High Court had directed the producer of Udaipur Files, Amit Jani, to arrange a private screening of the movie and its trailer for all counsel of both parties, after the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) had informed the court that it had mandated 40 to 50 cuts before granting certification. The High Court had also clarified that the manner in which the case against release had been reported in media was not what truly happened in the hearing before the Supreme Court, with portals reporting that the court had asked for it to be released.
Stay on the release of the film Udaipur Files had received strong criticism from Kanhaiya Lal’s son, Yash Sahu.
Case Title: Mohammad Javed v. UOI and Jani Firefox Media v. Maulana Arshad Madani
Hearing Date: July 24, 2025
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi