The sequel faces a legal challenge in the Kerala High Court, with petitioners alleging that its certification violates safeguards meant to prevent films from inciting communal disharmony.
With elections approaching, the film has drawn sharp political reactions over expression, state responsibility and the targeting of minority communities.
The controversy has revived broader questions about how cinema is used to shape political narratives, and who gets to define truth.
A woman sporting a tilak and wearing a burqa is restrained, her mouth forced open, and something is shoved in against her will. The dramatic framing suggests it’s meant to be shocking beyond belief; yet, because it’s the teaser for The Kerala Story 2, everyone is meant to gasp at the horror of it being beef. As though it were some outrageously sinister item rather than just food.
Set for release on February 27, The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond has reignited the controversy that surrounded its predecessor, The Kerala Story, released in May 2023. The first film, set in Kerala, claimed to portray women allegedly coerced into converting to Islam and subsequently drawn into the Islamic State (IS) group.
Following widespread objections, the filmmakers were directed to add a disclaimer clarifying that there was no evidence to support the claim that 32,000 women from Kerala were forced to convert and join ISIS. The Supreme Court also required the film to clearly state that it is a work of fiction, despite the makers’ repeated assertions that it was based on true events and years of research.
Now, the sequel has again landed in legal and political crossfire. Citing its divisive nature, a petitioner from Kannur, Kerala, has moved the High Court challenging the certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). The petitioner, Sreedevi Namboodiri of Kannavam, has named the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the CBFC and producer Vipul Amrutlal Shah as respondents in the writ petition filed on February 18.
On Thursday, a Bench led by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued notices to all respondents and listed the matter for hearing on 24 February. The petition argues that the CBFC certified the film, The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond, does not adhere to the requirements of the Cinematograph Act 1952. It alleges that the CBFC failed to apply the safeguards under Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act, which prohibits certification of films that threaten public order, decency or morality, or are likely to incite an offence. Citing Sections 196 and 197 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, the plea contends that the content could promote disharmony between religious or regional groups.
The petitioner objected to the closing Hindi slogan in the teaser, “Ab sahenge nahin… ladenge” (“We will not tolerate it any more… we will fight”), arguing that it signalled retaliation and risked fuelling communal tensions.
With Kerala heading into elections, news of the sequel has triggered sharp political reactions. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, writing on X, said: “Reports of a sequel to the hate-mongering film The Kerala Story must be treated with the utmost seriousness. Having already seen through the communal agenda and blatant falsehoods of the first installment, Kerala will once again reject this attempt to demonise our secular fabric.”
He added that it was shocking that fabricated narratives aimed at inciting communal discord were allowed to go unchecked.
The Chief Minister’s comments drew strong responses from BJP leaders. Former Minister of State for External Affairs and Parliamentary Affairs V. Muraleedharan said, “I have not seen the film, so I cannot decide if it targets Kerala,” he said.
Referring to constitutional provisions, Muraleedharan noted that once a film is produced, its exhibition is decided by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). “The Board will see the movie, examine it, and then decide on the certification,” he said, adding that there are “many avenues” to legally oppose a film.
Muraleedharan questioned why the Chief Minister chose to oppose the film on social media rather than approaching a court of law. If there were valid objections, he argued, they should be raised legally. Expressing views on social media, he said, suggested that the Chief Minister was not confident of a valid legal position. “This means he was posturing on social media for gaining some brownie points,” added Muraleedharan. Kerala BJP state president Rajeev Chandrasekhar too had raised the same question on February 19 and he said that no one had appointed Vijayan as the protector of any community.
Referring to the first film, Muraleedharan said he had watched The Kerala Story and found nothing objectionable in it. “What is wrong with it?” he asked. He added that the title does not imply the story represents the entire state. “What is in a name?” he remarked. When it was pointed out that the state’s name appears in the title, he said the producers had not claimed the film depicts Kerala as a whole. What is shown, he explained, could be based on a specific or isolated incident. Filmmakers, he said, have the right to artistic expression, which “need not reflect the general trend.”
Political criticism from the Opposition has been sharp too. Also slamming the move was Congress General secretary and Alappuzha MP KC Venugopal. He described the sequel as an “anti-Kerala story”, arguing that it exaggerates isolated incidents and presents them as a general reality. Kerala, Venugopal said, is known not only for its natural beauty but also for its strong social fabric shaped by progressive movements and good governance. The film, he added, goes against the culture, values and lived experiences of the people of the state.
Venugopal further alleged that the timing of the film was aimed at spreading hatred and polarising Kerala for political gain ahead of elections. “This malicious attempt will fail,” he said, adding that the people of Kerala understand such propaganda and would reject it. Truth and social unity, he asserted, are stronger than manufactured narratives.
CPI(M) Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas said: “BJP has no shame in bringing such a septic tank product as propaganda material. People of Kerala are wise enough to see through this diabolic game. It will not be surprising if the Prime Minister will yet again be the brand ambassador of the movie as he was with Kerala Story-1.”
Brittas added that the BJP aims to make inroads into Kerala and may succeed in maligning the state to some extent, but it would not be easy or straighforward. Social media, he said, had already mounted swift and pointed rebuttals that firmly debunked the film’s claims. “If the film’s makers had any sense of shame, they would have abandoned the project,” said Brittas.
IUML Rajya Sabha MP Haris Beeran also described the sequel as “clearly a propaganda film” with a political objective. According to him, the makers had expected a strong reaction in Kerala in 2023, and when that failed, returned with a new version which is little more than a repetition of the original, made more overtly propagandist because elections are approaching. He questioned the conduct of the CBFC, noting what he described as double standards in its approach to certification.
Citing the case of the Malayalam film Janaki, where objections were raised even to the title, Beeran asked why films capable of deepening communal divisions were being overlooked. When content suits political interests, he argued, it is defended as artistic expression; when it does not, the principle is reversed.
“If they can be so sensitive about a harmless title, why do they ignore films that can deepen communal divisions?” he asked. The film, he noted, was cleared only after court intervention, exposing what he described as a clear double standard: when content suits their politics, it is defended as artistic expression, and when it does not, the principle is reversed.
Despite the heated exchanges, Opposition leaders insist that Kerala’s strength lies in its long tradition of coexistence and social harmony. Venugopal said that through The Kerala Story, Muslims were being targeted and fear deliberately spread against minority communities. “In other parts of India, the same ideological forces are attacking Christians by disrupting prayers, targeting Sikhs, and intimidating other marginalised communities, including Dalits. This pattern shows that hatred and division are their main tools of propaganda.”
Kerala, he added, has always stood united across religions, castes and communities. “Our society is rooted in coexistence, brotherhood and mutual respect. Hatred may be their agenda, but unity is our answer. No amount of false narratives or communal poison can weaken the bonds among our people,” said Venugopal.
Even as the legal battle continues, the confrontation about The Kerala Story 2 is about more than that. It is about demonising a state and minority communities and who decides what is the truth and what is real?
