The fate of Junaid Khan's debut film Maharaj remains undecided. Aamir Khan's son's debut film was scheduled to be released on the OTT platform Netflix on June 14 initially. However, the makers were given a stay order on the release after receiving a complaint from a community over the contents of the film.&nbsp; 
 
On Wednesday (June 19), the Gujarat High Court said it would take a call on whether to watch Maharaj to decide on the plea against its release on streaming platform Netflix for allegedly hurting religious sentiments.&nbsp; 
 
The interim stay on the release of the movie granted by the court of Justice Sangeeta Vishen continued for one more day as the matter was kept for further hearing on Thursday.&nbsp;

Yash Raj Films, the producer of the movie, offered to provide the link and password to the court to watch the movie in order to decide whether it hurts the religious sentiments of a particular community as argued by the petitioners.&nbsp; 
 
Complain against Maharaj&nbsp; 
 
Members of the Pushtimarg sect have filed a petition against the release after they came across articles about the film which is based on the libel case of 1862 heard and decided by the British judges.&nbsp; 
 
The petitioners have pointed out that the British-era court, which had decided the libel case, "castigates the Hindu religion and makes seriously blasphemous comments against Lord Krishna as well as the devotional songs and hymns."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/maharaj-on-netflix-heres-why-aamir-khans-son-junaids-debut-film-is-not-releasing-today-731616">Maharaj on Netflix: Here's why Aamir Khan's son Junaid's debut film is not releasing today&nbsp;</a> 
 
The court said it will be open to decide whether to watch the movie, while agreeing to hear the matter on merits and posted it for further arguments on Thursday.

It&nbsp;"will be in addition to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties," Justice Vishen said after the YRF offered to provide the link and password for the court to watch the movie.&nbsp; 
 
The lawyers for the petitioners as well as respondent YRF submitted that while the court may watch the movie, they were not giving up on issues of maintainability of the petition.

"Let the arguments get over. If the court feels the need we will give the link, if the court feels there is no need, we will not," lawyer Shalin Mehta appearing for the YRF said.&nbsp;

Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Mihir Joshi said that he has no issue with the court watching the movie to decide on the petition.

"If it does not run down our religion then let them go ahead with the release. We are not interested in stretching the matter any further," he said.

The petitioners have claimed that their religious sentiments would be "seriously hurt" if the movie is permitted to be released, and is likely to affect the public order and incite violence against followers of the sect.&nbsp;

Earlier, the petitioners had approached the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, requesting it to take immediate measures to block the film's release.

However, there was no response or action from the ministry, it was stated.

They said the release of the movie is likely to incite hatred and violence against the Pushtimarg sect, which would be in breach of the code of ethics under the Information Technology Rules, and the self-regulation code of Over the Top Technology.

 
The 1862 libel case was centered on a clash between a Vaishnavite religious leader and social reformer, Karsandas Mulji, who, in an article in a Gujarati weekly, had alleged that the godman had sexual liaisons with his female devotees.

Helmed by Siddharth P Malhotra,&nbsp;Maharaj&nbsp;also stars Jaideep Ahlawat and Shalini Pandey in key roles and is a period film.

(With agency inputs)

The fate of Junaid Khan's debut film Maharaj remains undecided. Aamir Khan's son's debut film was scheduled to be released on the OTT platform Netflix on June 14 initially.

The fate of Junaid Khan's debut film Maharaj remains undecided. Aamir Khan's son's debut film was scheduled to be released on the OTT platform Netflix on June 14 initially. However, the makers were given a stay order on the release after receiving a complaint from a community over the contents of the film. On Wednesday (June 19), the Gujarat High Court said it would take a call on whether to watch Maharaj to decide on the plea against its release on streaming platform Netflix for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The interim stay on the release of the movie granted by the court of Justice Sangeeta Vishen continued for one more day as the matter was kept for further hearing on Thursday. Yash Raj Films, the producer of the movie, offered to provide the link and password to the court to watch the movie in order to decide whether it hurts the religious sentiments of a particular community as argued by the petitioners. Complain against Maharaj Members of the Pushtimarg sect have filed a petition against the release after they came across articles about the film which is based on the libel case of 1862 heard and decided by the British judges. The petitioners have pointed out that the British-era court, which had decided the libel case, "castigates the Hindu religion and makes seriously blasphemous comments against Lord Krishna as well as the devotional songs and hymns." Maharaj on Netflix: Here's why Aamir Khan's son Junaid's debut film is not releasing today The court said it will be open to decide whether to watch the movie, while agreeing to hear the matter on merits and posted it for further arguments on Thursday. It "will be in addition to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties," Justice Vishen said after the YRF offered to provide the link and password for the court to watch the movie. The lawyers for the petitioners as well as respondent YRF submitted that while the court may watch the movie, they were not giving up on issues of maintainability of the petition. "Let the arguments get over. If the court feels the need we will give the link, if the court feels there is no need, we will not," lawyer Shalin Mehta appearing for the YRF said. Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Mihir Joshi said that he has no issue with the court watching the movie to decide on the petition. "If it does not run down our religion then let them go ahead with the release. We are not interested in stretching the matter any further," he said. The petitioners have claimed that their religious sentiments would be "seriously hurt" if the movie is permitted to be released, and is likely to affect the public order and incite violence against followers of the sect. Earlier, the petitioners had approached the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, requesting it to take immediate measures to block the film's release. However, there was no response or action from the ministry, it was stated. They said the release of the movie is likely to incite hatred and violence against the Pushtimarg sect, which would be in breach of the code of ethics under the Information Technology Rules, and the self-regulation code of Over the Top Technology. The 1862 libel case was centered on a clash between a Vaishnavite religious leader and social reformer, Karsandas Mulji, who, in an article in a Gujarati weekly, had alleged that the godman had sexual liaisons with his female devotees. Helmed by Siddharth P Malhotra, Maharaj also stars Jaideep Ahlawat and Shalini Pandey in key roles and is a period film. (With agency inputs)

Interim stay of Junaid's Khan debut film Maharaj extended by a day

Congress leader Ahmed Patel told the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday that there was no merit in a plea challenging his election to the Rajya Sabha as MLAs are supposed to vote for their party candidates according to a Supreme Court judgement.&nbsp;

After the EC invalidated the votes of Congress rebels Raghavjee Patel and Bholabhai Gohel for showing their ballot papers to the BJP’s polling agent in the presence of BJP president Amit Shah, Patel was declared the winner along with Shah and Union minister Smriti Irani in the Rajya Sabha polls held in August last year.

BJP leader Balwantsinh Rajput, who lost to Patel in the Rajya Sabha elections, had filed an election petition, challenging the decision of the Election Commission to invalidate two votes as demanded by the Congress.

According to him, if these two votes had been counted, he would have defeated Patel. He had argued that a whip issued by the Leader of Opposition in the Assembly asking all Congress MLAs to vote for Patel was “threatening” and amounted to exercise of “undue influence” on voters. “As per the SC’s 2006 judgement… All party members are obliged to vote for the party (in Rajya Sabha election)… So, there is no question of undue influence on MLAs,” Kapil Sibal argued before Justice Bela Trivedi, appearing for Patel.

Rajput’s lawyer Advocate Nirupam Nanavati told the court that there was no need to dismiss the petition — as demanded by Patel — only because the copy served on the respondent was not attested. This can be corrected easily, Rajput’s lawyer said, accusing Patel of adopting a “dilatory tactic”. Sibal had said the petition served on the respondent (Ahmed Patel) was not the way it should be under the law, as it was not attested as a “true copy”. Rajput’s petition also alleges that Patel offered “bribe” to MLAs after taking them to resorts in Bengaluru.

BJP leader Balwantsinh Rajput, who lost to Patel in the Rajya Sabha elections, had filed an election petition, challenging the decision of the Election Commission to invalidate two votes as demanded by the Congress.

Congress leader Ahmed Patel told the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday that there was no merit in a plea challenging his election to the Rajya Sabha as MLAs are supposed to vote for their party candidates according to a Supreme Court judgement. After the EC invalidated the votes of Congress rebels Raghavjee Patel and Bholabhai Gohel for showing their ballot papers to the BJP’s polling agent in the presence of BJP president Amit Shah, Patel was declared the winner along with Shah and Union minister Smriti Irani in the Rajya Sabha polls held in August last year. BJP leader Balwantsinh Rajput, who lost to Patel in the Rajya Sabha elections, had filed an election petition, challenging the decision of the Election Commission to invalidate two votes as demanded by the Congress. According to him, if these two votes had been counted, he would have defeated Patel. He had argued that a whip issued by the Leader of Opposition in the Assembly asking all Congress MLAs to vote for Patel was “threatening” and amounted to exercise of “undue influence” on voters. “As per the SC’s 2006 judgement… All party members are obliged to vote for the party (in Rajya Sabha election)… So, there is no question of undue influence on MLAs,” Kapil Sibal argued before Justice Bela Trivedi, appearing for Patel. Rajput’s lawyer Advocate Nirupam Nanavati told the court that there was no need to dismiss the petition — as demanded by Patel — only because the copy served on the respondent was not attested. This can be corrected easily, Rajput’s lawyer said, accusing Patel of adopting a “dilatory tactic”. Sibal had said the petition served on the respondent (Ahmed Patel) was not the way it should be under the law, as it was not attested as a “true copy”. Rajput’s petition also alleges that Patel offered “bribe” to MLAs after taking them to resorts in Bengaluru.

Rajya Sabha polls: MLAs obliged to vote for party, Ahmed Patel tells Gujarat HC

gujarat-hc

Gujarat Hc, News on Gujarat Hc, stories on Gujarat Hc, articles on Gujarat Hc, Gujarat Hc stories at Wion, Gujarat Hc news, Gujarat Hc latest news

gujarat hc

Interim stay of Junaid's Khan debut film Maharaj extended by a day

Rajya Sabha polls: MLAs obliged to vote for party, Ahmed Patel tells Gujarat HC