Shah Bano's Daughter Moves MP High Court Against 'Haq' Movie, Says Producer Didn't Take Permission To Use Mother's Identity

Shah Bano Begum's daughter has moved the Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday (November 3) challenging the release of the movie 'Haq', starring Yami Gautam Dhar and Emraan Hashmi, contending that no permission was taken to use her mother's identity. 

The movie is scheduled for release on November 7 and is reportedly inspired from the landmark decision in Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) wherein the Supreme Court applied Section 125 CrPC and ruled that maintenance be given to Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, even after divorce.

Advocate Tousif Warsi, appearing for the daughter Siddiqua Begum Khan argued before Justice Pranay Verma:

"Entire movie is reflective of personal life of late Shri Shah Bano Begum...Even otherwise before depiction, the written consent was not obtained from the biological daughters of Shah Bano begum...Legal notice was issued to Respondent 3-6...personal life moments are included, that should be disclosed. Respondent 2 CBFC should not have issued certificate".

He said that the producers have said that the movie is not based on Shah Bano's life but on the judgment and literature available. He said that teaser is very derogatory. He also said that depictions in trailer are not depictions of real life of Shah Bano Begum. 

He said, "What curtailed them (producers) from obtaining written consent before even using Shah Bano's name? They are portraying personal life...Trailer and teaser are not real events, petitioner is claiming". 

He argued that the identity is real but the demonstration is not real and that it related to the mother of the petitioner. "Relates to mother of petitioner, it is not on the judgment. We are not saying anything on judgment it has attained finality," the counsel said. 

The court said that the producers had said that movie is not based on personal life but on judgment. 

"If she has struggled, would it not be credit for her why derogation. It can be interpreted...as a person fighting for her rights," the court orally said. 

The counsel again said that what curtailed the producers from taking permission to use the petitioner's mother's life events including her struggles. 

The court asked if there was any judgment that permission is to be taken to which the counsel referred to a judgment.

Meanwhile the counsel for CBFC submitted that the board has proceeded and given certificate on the fact that movie is a fiction and not a biopic. 

"Something which is fictitious in nature no permission is required. Teaser does not say it is a biopic. Teaser says movie is inspired by judgment of apex court...," the counsel said. He added that the judgment referred to by petitioner says that if it is part of public record no consent is required.

Meanwhile Counsel for producer Junglee Movies submitted that the movie is preceded by a Disclaimer. He said that the movie is based on a book 'Bharat Ki Beti' and Supreme Court judgment. 

Noting that the disclaimer was not on record the court orally said, "I'll keep it tomorrow bring it on record the disclaimer".

The matter is kept on Tuesday. 

Case title:  MS. SIDDIQUA BEGUM KHAN v/s  UNION OF INDIA and OTHERS

WP - 42708/2025