The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to stop the release of Haq, starring Yami Gautam Dhar and Emraan Hashmi. Directed by Suparn S Varma, the film draws inspiration from a landmark
Supreme Court judgment that granted maintenance rights to divorced Muslim women.The petition was filed by Siddiqua Begum Khan, daughter of Shah Bano Begum, who argued that the filmmakers could not have made the film or depicted such events without obtaining consent. Justice Pranay Verma at the Indore Bench of the High Court rejected the arguments, holding, "Privacy or reputation earned by a person during his or her lifetime extinguishes with his or her death. It cannot be inherited like a movable or immovable property."The court also accepted makers' stance that Haq is 'inspired' by the landmark case. "Since the disclaimer itself states that the same is dramatisation and is fictional and an adaptation of a book and is inspired by a judgment of the Apex Court, it cannot be said that the contents of the film are fabricated. Since the film is an inspiration and a fiction, some amount of leeway is certainly permissible and merely because the same is done, it cannot be said that there has been any sensationalisation or false portrayal," the Court said.ALSO READ - Haq: 5 Reasons Why Emraan Hashmi-Yami Gautam Courtroom Drama Is A Must-Watch For The Younger GenerationIn its final verdict, the Court also noted that the film is stated to be largely inspired from publicly available court records. "Once a matter becomes a matter of public record, the right of privacy no longer subsists and it becomes a legitimate subject for comment by the Press and Media amongst others. The same is precisely the fact situation in the present case," it said.Additionally, the Court also accepted an argument by the filmmakers that the petitioner had an alternative approach of heading to the Central government for revoking or suspending the censor certificate granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), instead of coming to the Court directly."The petitioner did not act immediately but preferred this petition on 01.11.2025 i.e. less than a week prior to release of the film and that too after grant of the Certificate... At least a month ago, cause of action for the petitioner to approach this Court had accrued but she waited for a considerable period of time for preferring this petition. Her conduct is hence not that of a vigilant litigant," the Court noted. Insomnia Films (a producer) was represented by advocates HY Mehta, Chinmay Mehta along with Chandrajit Das, briefed by Parinaam Law Associates. Junglee Pictures was represented by Senior Advocate Ajay Bagadia and advocate Ritik Gupta along with advocate Jasmeet Kaur, briefed by Anand Naik & Co.
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176242512815253308.webp)

/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176235868282488431.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-17623690301595161.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176226062701769523.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176228156872764950.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176242152884424396.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-17624145283433596.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176227808327680000.webp)

/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176223952471597410.webp)
/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-176224656716115507.webp)