"Will Devotion Diminish If Children Watch It?": Supreme Court Questions Odisha Govt's Objection To 'Mahaprabhu Jagannath' Film

Appearing for the State, the Advocate General Pitambar Acharya submitted that the matter had been mentioned before the Chief Justice of India, who directed it to be listed before the present Bench. He informed the Court that two miscellaneous applications had been filed, while the main writ petition remained pending before the High Court.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, supporting the State's request, submitted that the Advocate General was appearing on behalf of the Temple Committee representing devotees of Lord Jagannath. He told the Bench that the Committee had approached the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) with its objections to the film and sought that those objections be considered before the movie is released.

"The Temple Committee has moved the CBFC saying these are our objections. Till our objections are addressed, please do not permit [the release]. Now the CBFC cannot take a decision because this Court had directed that it has to be released. Allow the CBFC to take an independent decision," Mehta submitted.

Justice BV Nagarathna, however, reminded the parties that the Court had consciously balanced competing considerations while passing its earlier order. "We balanced both the things because we are also conscious of law and order. After the festival, we had said release the film," Justice Nagarathna observed.

Reiterating the State's objection, the Advocate General argued that "they have presented Lord Jagannath in a cartoon form" and submitted that the authorities possessed revisional powers to revisit the issue.

Justice Nagarathna responded by questioning whether the release of the animated film would diminish the faith of devotees. "Whether devotion for Lord Jagannath will diminish if this picture is released for children? It will not," the judge remarked.

Mehta then requested that the miscellaneous applications be placed before the Bench either later in the day or the following day.

Accepting the request, the Supreme Court posted the matter for hearing tomorrow, i.e. July 29.

Previous Proceedings

Senior Advocate Devdatt Kamat had appeared for makers of the film and told the bench that crores had been invested in the film. "There is grave economic loss my lords...", the bench was told.

"We have been apprised that the Lord Jagannath Rath Yatra commenced yesterday and will continue for a period of 10 days, until July 27...it is stated by the appellant that the tv series has been exhibited on youtube. Yesterday onwards for a period of 10 days lord Jagannath yatra and rituals connected therewith are taking place..In these circumstances, we permit the film to be exhibited on or after 28th July. Appeal is disposed of in aforesaid terms.", the bench had gone on to order.

Earlier, a CJI Surya Kant led bench had agreed to list the plea for hearing after a mentioning was made by Kamat. The plea challenged the Orissa High Court's decision from July 15 which has restrained the release of the animated film Mahaprabhu Jagannath, observing that while freedom of speech and expression is constitutionally protected, it cannot be permitted to shatter religious sentiments in a manner that results in unrest in society.

What happened in the High Court

In the impugned decision, High Court found that releasing the film during the ongoing Rath Yatra, without incorporating changes suggested after a special screening before the Gajapati Maharaja and the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration, would be ‘counterproductive’.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman passed the interim order on a public interest litigation seeking revocation of the certificate granted to the film by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and a direction restraining its exhibition in Odisha. According to the petitioners, Ele Animations Pvt. Ltd. released the teaser of Mahaprabhu Jagannath on June 6, 2026, announcing its theatrical release.

The teaser and the film's content triggered widespread objections from devotees, the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration and others, prompting the producer to organise a special screening before the Gajapati Maharaja of Puri and Temple Administration officials.During that screening, several objections were reportedly raised regarding depictions said to be inconsistent with established religious traditions, spiritual history and long-standing temple practices.

The producer allegedly assured those present that suitable changes would be made. The petitioners, however, contended that despite those assurances, the producer announced the film's release on July 17 without making the necessary changes.

They alleged that the animated film misrepresents the culture, rituals, traditions and devotional history associated with Lord Jagannath by portraying fictional childhood episodes, personal adventures and battle sequences involving the deity, depicting Lord Jagannath speaking and behaving in an invented manner, and including narratives allegedly contrary to the Skanda Purana, the Brahma Purana and long-established temple traditions.

According to the petition, such portrayals can harm devotees' religious beliefs and cause public unrest. Opposing the petition, the producer submitted that the film carried a disclaimer clarifying that it was a fictional story with no connection to historical or religious reality and that it was not intended to undermine devotees' faith.

It further argued that the film was protected by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), and pointed out that substantial financial investment had already been made in the project. Considering the rival submissions, the Bench observed that films constitute a powerful medium of expression whose impact must be assessed on the basis of their overall effect on the public, particularly where they concern matters of religious faith.

The Court observed that although films are primarily intended for entertainment, they can significantly influence public thought and action. It held that while freedom of expression is protected under Article 19(1)(a), that right must be balanced against the reasonable restrictions contained in Article 19(2) of the Constitution. "Even if the movie enjoins the guarantee of the freedom of expression and/or speech, but it impacted the thoughts and the action of the common people. At times may shatter the sentiments, the emotions and the religious belief, which cannot be allowed, if it results in unrest in the peaceful society."

The Bench also attached significance to the timing of the proposed release. It noted that the producer intended to release the film without incorporating the changes suggested during the screening before the Gajapati Maharaja and members of the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration.

Since the Rath Yatra had commenced on July 16 and a large congregation of devotees was expected, the Court observed that releasing the film on July 17 would be "counterproductive." It further noted that the alleged objectionable portions of the film identified in the PIL required a detailed examination after exchange of affidavits. Accordingly, the Court restrained Ele Animations Pvt. Ltd. from releasing Mahaprabhu Jagannath on July 17, 2026 "or thereafter without leave of the Court or until the next date, whichever is earlier." The matter has been directed to be listed on August 5, 2026, along with the connected writ petition.