Kerala High Court Dismisses Petition Against Film Title of 'The Kerala Story 2'

The Kerala High Court has ruled against a petition that sought to change the title of the film 'The Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond', which was argued to portray Kerala negatively. The court emphasized the importance of judicial respect and allowed the petitioners to file a new request without casting aspersions on the judiciary. The film, which depicts controversial themes surrounding religious conversion, has sparked significant debate and concern regarding its impact on communal harmony. This ruling follows a previous stay on the film's release, which was lifted earlier in the day. The case highlights ongoing tensions surrounding representation in media and its implications for society.

By Narendra Chaudhary Mar 5, 2026, 16:37 IST

Court's Decision on Film Title

On Thursday, the Kerala High Court declined to consider a petition that requested the film The Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond be renamed to exclude the terms 'Kerala' or 'Keralam'.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar VM noted that the petitioner appeared to be attempting to 'cast an aspersion' on another bench that had previously lifted the stay on the film's release. The film debuted on February 27.

Earlier that same day, a division bench of Justices SA Dharmadhikari and PV Balakrishnan overturned the stay order issued by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, which had halted the film's release.

The film The Kerala Story 2 - Goes Beyond reportedly portrays women from various states being enticed into relationships with Muslim men and pressured into converting to Islam. The teaser, released on February 17, features a scene where a Hindu woman is depicted as being forced to eat beef.

On February 26, Justice Thomas expressed concerns that the film could disrupt communal harmony. He criticized the Central Board of Film Certification for not adhering to guidelines when approving the film and instructed them to reassess the certification.

The film's producer, Vipul Amrutlal Shah, contested the stay, arguing that preventing the release of a film already approved by the Central Board of Film Certification was an extreme measure that should only be taken in rare cases.

The new petition was submitted by Chandramohanan KC, a retired social science educator and activist, alongside advocate Mehnaz P Mohammed.

The petitioners informed the court that the producer's plea was addressed even before the interim stay order was made available on the court's website.

The court questioned the petitioners, stating, 'How can you cast aspersions against the judges? You must remove this. If you are dissatisfied, you can appeal to the Supreme Court. However, as a division bench, I cannot rule on the remarks made by another bench.'

The petitioners raised objections to the film's title, claiming it depicted Kerala as the 'epicenter of terrorism and radicalization' and labeled it a 'terror nursery' without credible evidence to back such assertions.

They also contended that the film portrayed the Muslim community in a negative light.

The bench permitted the petitioners to submit a new petition, excluding the paragraph that allegedly cast aspersions on the court.