The makers of Ram Gopal Varma's film had appealed in the Supreme Court for an urgent leave petition challenging the stay order on the release of the film.
Supreme Court refuses 'urgent' order on Ram Gopal Varma's plea against high court stay on Lakshmi's NTR
Mumbai - 02 Apr 2019 15:12 IST
Updated : 16:47 IST
Our Correspondent
The Supreme Court has denied the makers of the Telugu film, Lakshmi's NTR, an urgent listing challenging a stay by the Andhra Pradesh high court on the film's release.
The Supreme Court bench, headed by chief justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, told the lawyers of the production house that the court would take up the hearing in 'due course'.
The Andhra Pradesh high court had on 28 March ordered a stay on the biopic of the late Andhra Pradesh chief minister NT Rama Rao as seen through the eyes of his second wife, Lakshmi Parvathy.
Rakesh Reddy, producer of the film, had appealed to the Supreme Court for an urgent hearing on the high court's order.
Producer Rakesh Reddy outside the Supreme Court to fight for #LakshmisNTR ‘s release in AP pic.twitter.com/vil5KLtYIZ
— Ram Gopal Varma (@RGVzoomin) April 1, 2019
The film was initially scheduled to be released on 29 March. But the release had to be postponed on account of the high court order.
Members of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) had filed a petition in the high court seeking a stay on the film. The petitioners argued that the film's content would be derogatory towards the party.
The petitioners also pointed to Ram Gopal Varma's Twitter handle, which had conducted a poll asking if the film would affect the TDP's electoral chances, as evidence of the film's likelihood of influencing voters in the upcoming general election.
A high court bench of Justice AV Sesha Sai and Justice U Durga Prasad Rao directed counsel to hold a special screening of the film on 3 April, 'for a better appreciation of the contents', according to Livelaw.com.
However, the makers of the film decided to approach the Supreme Court questioning the high court's jurisdiction in 'holding film screenings or previews'.
The production house claimed that the film had clearance from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and the film had been produced without political patronage.
However, the request by the production house's counsel for urgent listing of the petition was declined. The petitioners will likely have to hold a screening tomorrow for the high court if they want the stay to be lifted.