Bengaluru: Karnataka high court has refused to stop the release of the Kannada film Boss, holding that criminal courts decide cases on evidence and law, not on cinematic portrayals, even if they bear similarities to an ongoing trial.Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, in a judgment delivered on July 17, dismissed a petition filed by actor Darshan and his wife Vijayalakshmi challenging a trial court order refusing to restrain the film’s release. The petitioners argued that Boss closely mirrored the prosecution’s version of the Renukaswamy murder case, in which Darshan is an accused, and could prejudice the trial.Rejecting the contention, the court observed: “Merely because a movie is released depicting a few instances which may be similar to the ongoing trial, it cannot be said the courts dealing with such a trial would be influenced or swayed by such depiction…”According to the petition, the film contains 13 similarities to the pending criminal case, including a title resembling one of Darshan’s earlier hit films, characters with similarities to people involved in the case, and a storyline that allegedly recreates the prosecution’s version of events. The petitioners argued that these similarities, coupled with the opening disclaimer stating the film was “inspired by true events”, effectively turned it into a cinematic re-enactment of the prosecution’s case.They also contended that the trial court had committed a constitutional error by giving precedence to the filmmakers’ right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) over their rights to a fair trial and privacy under Article 21.Opposing the plea, the film’s producer and director submitted that the Central Board of Film Certification had examined the film, directed certain modifications and disclaimers, and granted certification after those conditions were met.Accepting this argument, Justice Yerur held that once the statutory expert body has certified a film, courts should not assume the role of a “super censor board”.The HC also rejected the claim that the film violated Darshan’s right to privacy. It noted that since he was an accused in the murder case, newspapers, television channels and other media had been reporting developments in the investigation and court proceedings almost daily. As substantial information was already in the public domain, the film could not be said to have infringed the petitioners’ constitutional right to privacy, the judge added.“Courts are well-equipped and possess the wisdom to decide matters on their legalities, based on oral and documentary evidence, witness statements, and settled legal principles — not on the depiction made in a movie, even if it has certain similarities,” said Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur.
