The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to modify its earlier order permitting the nationwide release of the animated film Mahaprabhu Jagannath, observing that courts should not become arbiters of artistic creativity. The Bench emphasised that interfering with creative works merely because a section of people disagrees with their portrayal could have far-reaching consequences for literature, cinema, and other forms of artistic expression.
A Bench comprising Justices B. V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan rejected applications filed by the Odisha government and the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration seeking changes to the Court‘s earlier decision dated July 17. That earlier order had permitted the film’s release across India on or after July 28, following the conclusion of the annual Jagannath Rath Yatra.
Objections Raised by Odisha Authorities
During the hearing, the Odisha government’s Advocate General argued that the previous order had relied on a certification process that could still be reconsidered. He informed the Court that the Temple Administration had also approached the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), alleging that the movie contained fictional elements that could hurt religious sentiments. According to the submissions, the State government had separately communicated its concerns to the Union government regarding the film’s content.
The State further contended that although the filmmakers had reportedly agreed to remove one disputed scene, they continued to maintain that the film was a fictional animated work.
Supreme Court Defends Creative Freedom
Justice Nagarathna expressed reservations about entertaining such objections. She observed that if courts began restricting artistic works whenever a few individuals objected, it could eventually lead to censorship of numerous creative works depicting Hindu deities or religious stories.
The Bench remarked that India has a long tradition of multiple retellings of epics such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, with different regions presenting their own interpretations. It also noted that the animated film was intended primarily for children and should be viewed in that context.
Producers Clarify Their Stand
Appearing for the film’s producers, senior advocate Devadatt Kamat denied that the filmmakers had agreed to all the suggested modifications. He informed the Court that representatives of the Temple Administration had left a special screening before it concluded and asserted that the film did not portray Lord Jagannath in a disrespectful manner. According to him, the story revolves around a child devoted to the deity rather than presenting any offensive depiction.
Court Leaves Editing Decision to Filmmakers
While refusing to alter its earlier order, the Supreme Court observed that the filmmakers remained free to make voluntary edits if they considered them appropriate. However, the Bench made it clear that such decisions should rest with the creators and not be imposed by the Court.
Reiterating the importance of protecting artistic freedom, the Bench concluded that the judiciary cannot assume the role of evaluating or censoring creative expression simply because differing views exist.