The Kerala High Court on Thursday, 26 February 2026, granted a 15-day interim stay on the release of The Kerala Story 2, Goes Beyond, just one day before its scheduled theatrical debut on 27 February.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas of the court, who had been hearing three public interest petitions since Tuesday, directed the producers not to release the film until the pending pleas challenging its Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) certificate are finally heard and decided. The petitioners, led by Sreedev Namboodiri, contend that the film misrepresents Kerala, links the state with terrorism and forced religious conversions, and could inflame communal tensions.
The court observed that the petitioners’ concerns “appear possibly genuine” and instructed the producers not to proceed with any transaction related to the sale or transfer of theatrical or distribution rights. The Union Government, through its counsel, defended the CBFC’s decision to certify the film.
The producers, meanwhile, warned of severe financial losses, stating that distribution arrangements, including overseas rights were already in place. The case has reignited a fierce national debate about the boundaries of artistic freedom, the responsibilities of the film certification body, and what it means to invoke a state’s name and identity in the service of storytelling.
What Was Said, and Why the CBFC Is in the Dock
During the hearings, sharp exchanges took place, particularly when the producers pressed for an urgent ruling, citing distribution commitments and international release plans, arguing that even a single day’s delay would cause significant financial loss. Justice Bechu Kurian, however, cautioned them against attempting to “corner the court” into delivering a hurried verdict, making clear that the judiciary would take the necessary time to examine all legal aspects before passing an order.
A significant point of contention was the CBFC’s decision to award the film a U/A (unrestricted, with parental guidance) certificate rather than an ‘A’ (adult) rating. The court questioned why the film was not given an ‘A’ certificate instead, given the sensitive subject matter portrayed in the narrative.
Justice Kurian also raised questions about consistency in the CBFC’s standards, referring to the Malayalam film Haal, where a scene involving an RSS worker was reportedly asked to be removed, raising questions about whether the same rigour was applied here. Senior Counsel S Sreekumar, appearing for the filmmakers, argued that the petition was not legally maintainable and that once the CBFC had certified a film, the High Court could not substitute its own view.
The Union Government echoed this position, maintaining that the CBFC is a statutory expert body under the Cinematograph Act and that judicial interference with a certified film was unwarranted in the absence of clear illegality. The producers also opposed an earlier court direction to screen the film for the bench, with producer Vipul Amrutlal Shah arguing that “the court must not exercise its authority to view and evaluate films.” The court noted, with some exasperation, that the makers appeared reluctant to have the film examined by the bench, a resistance that did little to inspire judicial confidence.
The Story Behind the Sequel
The Kerala Story 2, Goes Beyond is directed by Kamakhya Narayan Singh and produced by Vipul Amrutlal Shah under the banner of Sunshine Pictures. It stars Ulka Gupta, Aditi Bhatia, and Aishwarya Ojha in leading roles. The film deals with the theme of young Hindu women being allegedly lured into interfaith marriages, then subjected to abuse and forced religious conversion, a subject that has triggered objections from sections of the Malayali community and led to fresh legal challenges. It is a sequel to the 2023 film The Kerala Story, which had itself sparked fierce national debate for its portrayal of alleged recruitment of women from Kerala into ISIS.
The sequel, however, reportedly extends its narrative across multiple Indian states, making its continued use of Kerala’s name in the title all the more contentious. At a press conference in Delhi on 23 February 2026, Shah and Singh introduced 30 women who claimed to have experienced forced religious conversions, but journalists noted the absence of any Malayali victims on the stage, pressing the filmmakers on why the film retained the name Kerala if the issue was, as they claimed, a pan-India story.
The filmmakers maintained that the film was “not politically motivated.” Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan described the sequel as potentially promoting divisive narratives, while Bihar politician Pappu Yadav questioned whether political parties should have any influence over filmmaking decisions at all. Both the Left and the Congress in Kerala have spoken out against the film, adding a political dimension to what is already a complex legal and cultural dispute. Advance bookings in several centres are now expected to be cancelled or refunded, adding to the financial strain on the producers, who had invested heavily in promotions and distribution arrangements.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Cinema, at its finest, holds up a mirror to society but a mirror can also distort. When a film chooses to place a real state’s name at the centre of a narrative about terrorism and forced conversion, it assumes a heavy burden of proof and an even heavier moral responsibility. The Kerala High Court’s decision to stay the release of The Kerala Story 2 for 15 days is not a verdict against artistic freedom, it is a reminder that freedom, in a plural democracy, is never unconditional.
The CBFC exists precisely to assess whether a film’s content meets the standards of public order, decency, and social harmony outlined under the Cinematograph Act. If the court finds, on careful examination, that those standards were not applied, that is not an indictment of cinema, it is an indictment of a regulatory process that failed to do its job.
At the same time, courts banning or indefinitely staying films can itself set a chilling precedent. The ideal outcome is not a permanent block, but rigorous scrutiny of the certification process, of the film’s factual claims, and of the responsibilities filmmakers bear when they use a living state’s name as a dramatic device.
Also Read: Amid Court Bomb Threat Wave, Suspected Device Found Near Sainthia Railway Tracks in West Bengal
Kerala Story makers to challenge court order
— IndiaToday (@IndiaToday) February 26, 2026
Filmmakers to move higher bench today itself
HC stays Kerala Story 2 release for 15 days@AnjileeIstwal & @nalinisharma_ share more details. pic.twitter.com/4lFnaKiwKe
