USHABEN NAVINCHANDRA TRIVEDI Vs. BHAGYALAXMI CHITRA MANDIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs appellants filed Civil Suit No. 2736 of 1975 in the City Civil Court. Ahmedabad on September 10 1975 claiming a permanent injunction against the defendants respondents restraining them from exhibiting the cinematographic picture named Jai Santoshi Maa. Defendant-respondent No. 1 is a name and style of business carried on by defendant-respondent No. 2 who had produced the said movie. Defendant respondent No. 3 is the Director of the movie and defendant-respondent No. 4 had written the theme thereof Defendant-respondent No. 5 is the distributor and defendants-respondents Nos. 6 to 14 are the theatres wherein the aforesaid movie was exhibited in the City of Ahmedabad After filing of the suit the plaintiffs took out a notice of motion for a temporary injunction restraining the exhibition of the movie by the defendants on notice being given to the defendants they appeared and showed cause. After hearing both the parties the learned City Civil Judge discharged the rule on the ground that the subject matter of the suit did not involve any civil right of the plaintiffs and consequently did not fall under sec. 9 of the Civil Procedure Code. In order to complete the judgment the learned trial Judge considered the motion on merits and came to the conclusion that the title of the movie and the advertising literature thereof clearly indicated that the movie was religious and mythological and it was natural that any person interested in mythology and when attracted and saw the picture it would hurt his religious belief. It is this order refusing the temporary injunction which is challenged in this appeal.

(2.) The plaintiffs claimed to be firm believers in Hindu religion and in Gods and Goddesses of the said religion even though they do not belong to any specific sect or Sampradaya. The plaintiffs hold in high esteem all Gods mentioned in the Puranas and are firm believers of Brahma Vishnu and Mahesh and Goddesses Laksmi Parvati and Saraswati etc. and visit their temples according to convenience. The background of the suit film is since last 20 years a practice amongst many Hindu women is prevalent of observing Vrat in the name of Santoshi Maa and the said Vrat has acquired considerable importance amongst Hindu women. The person observing the said Vrat has to partake one meal on Friday listen to the story of Santoshi Mata and distribute gram and gur as prasad and does not eat any sour items on that day. Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 have produced the said film taking the basis of the story of Santoshi Mata which is familiar to those observing the Vrat. The said story in short is that an old lady has 7 sons out of which she has more affection for 6 sons and the seventh was not a favourite son. The old lady used to serve food to the 7th son which remained after serving dinner to the 6 sons. The seventh son was a simpleton and was not aware of the discrimination but his wife was intelligent and sharp. She informed her husband about the discrimination and after having been convinced about such discrimination the seventh son went away to a distant city and obtained service in a shop. In course of time because of his honesty and efficiency he became a big business man. His wife was very miserable at home and she was sent to the forest to collect wood for fuel and was required to do considerable work. She was very badly treated and was given only a piece of bread and water in a broken dish. She saw some ladies observing the Vrat of Santoshi Mata and after asking them about the same she went to the temple of Santoshi Mata after taking gram and gur and commenced observing the Vrat After the lapse of one Friday she received a letter from her husband on the second Friday and on the third Friday she received money Thereafter her husband got a message in his dream through Santoshi Mata to return to his wife and accordingly he left for his house. His wife was in the temple and observing a cloud of dust she asked the reason thereof to Mataji who informed her that her husband was returning. Her husband had gone home and when she entered the house with log of wood on her head and asked for her piece of bread and water she was given the same in a broken dish and seeing that the husband took up a separate residence and stayed with his wife. Thereafter she wanted to celebrate the Vrat of Santoshi Mata and she had invited her elder sisters-in-law and their children. The elder sisters-in-law had coaxed the children to demand sour items for their food and the children asked for sour items which were not given. Therefore they asked for money and after taking the money the said children had purchased and eaten Amli. Santoshi Mata was infuriated because of non-observance of the Vrat and therefore the Government officers had arrived and arrested the husband. Therefore the wife again went to the temple of Santoshi Mata and prayed for forgiveness and while returning was greeted by her husband and therefore on the next Friday again the Vrat was celebrated at which Mataji assumed a devilish form and inspite of that the wife recognised her and was greatly elated at her arrival and threw a child to the Mataji who received the same in her arms and thereafter blessing all Mataji disappeared. According to the plaintiffs the Vrat of Santoshi Mata is a Vrat of folklore because there is no reference thereto in the scriptures. There are also no ancient temples of Santoshi Mata. Notwithstanding the fact that the story as above defendants Nos. 1 to 4 have produced the film which contains the following story. Ganpathys sister Mansa is tying Raksha on the hand of Ganpathy when his 2 sons also are present and they insisted that their aunt Mansa should also tie Raksha on their hands. Thereupon the aunt explained to them that Raksha could be tied by a sister and because they did not have sisters Raksha could not be tied on their hands. Thereupon the sons were disappointed and therefore Narada requested Ganpathy to produce a daughter and Ganpathy immediately produced a daughter who tied Raksha to the sons of Ganpathy. Narada declared that the daughter of Ganpathy would be known in the world as Santoshi Mata. There is no such incident in the Puranas and Ganpathy did not have a sister by the name Mansha. Ganpathys sisters name was Usha and there is no reference in the Puranas that Ganpathy had a daughter. After the introduction of Santoshi Mata in the picture there is a scene of temple of Santoshi Mata and the song arti of Santoshi Mata is being sung. Satyavati the heroine of the said film is returning home with her friends after performing the Aarti and on the way meets Birju the hero of the film. They fall in love at first sight and thereafter both of them go to their respective houses. The father of Satyavati is also a devotee of Santoshi Mata. Birju has 6 brothers and an old mother. The brothers are cultivating lands but Birju is an artist and is an expert in playing the flute and singing songs. He is invited to recite Bhajan at the temple of Santoshi Mata in the village of the heroine Satyavati and therefore Birju goes there and recites Bhajan at which time Satyavati and her friends are also present. While returning from the temple she is accosted by a villain Bankay who with his associates tried to molest Satyavati. At that time Birju with his friends arrive on the scene and Birju and his friends give a beating to the villain and his associates. Birju is slightly injured and Satyavati takes him to her house and informs her father about the incident. Thereafter Birju goes to his house. The brothers of Birju thereafter arrange the marriage of Satyavati with Birju. The marriage is performed and Birju and Satyavati return home when her elder sisters-in-law deliberately cause in- auspicious incidents to happen Thereafter both of them go on a pilgrimage of various places of Santoshi Mala. Thereafter there are scenes of Brahmani Laxmiji and Parvatiji. Narad goes before them and informs that he is a devotee of the three Goddesses but the people on earth are devotees of Santoshi Mata. Narada is praising Santoshi Mata and the devotion of Satyavati for Santoshi Mata. He further states that there is no goddess like Santoshi Mata and therefore the three Goddesses are jealous and decided to teach a lesson to Satyavati. In the meantime Brahma Vishnu and Mahesh in the guise of mendicants go to the house of Satyavati for Bhiksha and when they return Sarasvati Laxmi and Parvati inquire of them and they also praise Satyavati and state that Satyavati is a staunch devotee of Santoshi Mata and thereupon the Goddesses decide that they will not allow the influence of Santoshi Mata to increase and the Goddesses inform Satyavati to give up the devotion of Santoshi Mata but Satyavati humbly refuses to do so and thereupon the Goddesses challenge Satyavati to be prepared for the consequences. The wives of the brothers of Birju dislike Birju and therefore whatever food is left over in the plates of the others is being collected and served in a plate to Birju. Satyavati sees this and informs Birju about it and Birju also sees that Thereupon there are disputes in the house and Birju declares that he will return after earning money and leaves the house. Narada informs the three Goddesses that they must now have been pleased when the three Goddesses stated that so far only Birju has left his house we will see what happens to him After leaving the house Birju is crossing a river in a boat and the Goddesses have the boat sunk and Birju is drowned in the river Satyavati prays to Santoshi Mata for the welfare of her husband and thereupon Santoshi Mata lifts Birju out of the river and places him on the bank and brings him to life. Birju there. after goes to the temple of Santoshi Mata for Darshan where a rich jeweller becomes sick and unconscious. His jewellery is scattered over. Birju sees that and nurses the jeweller anal brings him to his senses and returns the jewellery to him and the jeweller gives employment to Birju where Birju achieves considerable progress with hard work and becomes a family member of the jeweller. The daughter of the jeweller is in love with Birju. But BirJu remember Satyavati and when the daughter of jewller shows love to Birju then Birju gets tip with the memory of Satyavati. At that time the three Goddesses contrive that Birju forgets Satyavati and Birju accepts the daughter of the jeweller and forgets his house. Satyavati who is being harassed from all sides now performs the Vrat of 16 Friday. Narad informs the three Goddesses that on the completion of the Vrat of Satyavati the Maya of the three Goddesses will be completed and there will be re-union of the husband and wife. Thereupon the Goddesses declare that they will not allow the Vrat to be completed. Santoshi Mata asks Birju to go to his home and when the Vrat is about to be completed Birju returns home with jewellery ornaments rings etc. and everybody welcomes him but seeing the condition of Satyavati he is very angry and stays separately. There is celebration of Vrat and Satyavati invites the brothers of Birju and at the time of worship and Bhajan the wives of the brothers of Birju pour sour things in the food and thereupon the children die and Santoshi Mata is angry and there is destruction. Satyavati again prays to Santoshi Mata and Santoshi Mata is pleased and revives the children. The case of the plaintiffs for injunction is based on the ground that the movie is presented as a religious and mythological one even through it is not so in fact. Persons having interest in religion and mythology will be attracted by the picture and when the same is seen by them it will hurt their feelings as Goddesses Saraswati Laxmi and Parvati are depicted jealous and are rediculed. The defendants have definitely distorted and abused Hindu mythology and they have depicted the mythology by introducing invented story.

(3.) The defendants have contested the application for motion to grant of temporary injunction contending that the suit filed is not of civil nature and no injunction could be issued either under the provisions of Order 39 Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) or the provisions of the Specific Relief Act. The suit had been filed by the plaintiffs with mala fide intention and to harass the defendants adding that defendant No. 1 had information that the plaintiffs have previously filed a suit against the film named Har Har Mahadev. In para 7 of the affidavit respondent No. 1 it is stated that the film in question is religious mythological one but denied that it hurt the religious feelings of Hindus. It is admitted by the defendants that some mythological books do not refer to the incidents of Santoshi Maa. The said film discloses in the very beginning that the entire film is imaginary and it would be fallacy to appreciate the said film with reference to mythological books. The defendants state that it is usual and normal to show in religious and mythological films certain incidents which go to show that Gods or Goddesses are trying to test the sincerity of the devotee and to that end the devotee is made to suffer misery and humiliation. In the film the three Goddesses are depicted to be saying that they tried to test the sincerity of Satyavati in her devotion to Santoshi Mata and this itself indicates that there was no malice as alleged by the plaintiffs They deny that the movie hurts religious feelings of Hindus. The film had been exhibited in large number of cities and towns. There were about 100 prints being exhibited throughout the country. The said film was being exhibited since last 4 months that is since June 1975 and no person had Complained about his religious feelings having been hurt by the exhibition of the film. The film had been seen by about 1 45 0 0 people throughout India and none of them have complained about their religious feelings being hurt The film is being exhibited after the Board of Censor had given certificate under the Cinematograph Act 1952