Maharaj, starring Aamir Khan's son Junaid Khan and Jaideep Ahlawat in the lead roles, is based on the Maharaj Libel Case of 1862 which is considered to be one of the most significant legal battles of all time in India. Directed by Siddharth P Malhotra, the film is all set to stream on Netflix from June 14. On Wednesday, the makers of Maharaj treated the audience with the first look poster of the film and within no time, it raised anticipation about the film's plot. Since it is based on true events, let's understand what exactly is the Maharaj Libel Case of 1862.
Junaid to play Karsandas Mulji
Maharaj will revolve around the story of journalist and social reformer Karsandas Mulji, who fought for women's rights. He also wrote on widow remarriage and stood up for the oppressed section of society.
What is Maharaj Libel Case of 1862?
The Maharaj Libel Case of 1862 was a legal event in British India that highlighted issues of freedom of the press, religious authority, and social reform.
The case was brought about by Karsandas Mulji who was critical of the practices of the Vallabhacharya sect of Hinduism. In a Gujarati newspaper, he had published an article alleging that the head of the sect, known as the Maharaj, had engaged in immoral activities, including sexual misconduct with his female devotees. In those days, the Maharaj was regarded as a divine figure by followers, who took any accusations against him very seriously.
In response to Mulji's accusations, Jadunathji Brijratanji Maharaj, one of the heads of the sect, had filed a libel suit against Mulji in 1862. The case was filed in the Supreme Court of Bombay. He argued that the allegations against Maharaj were defamatory and an attack on the religious sentiments of the followers. In his defense, Mulji had argued for the freedom of the press to expose immoral practices happening in society.
Back then, the case had led to tension between traditional religious authorities and emerging social reform movements.
Later, the court acquitted Mulji, in a landmark judgement, and ruled that the allegations were not made with malicious intent but were part of a broader critique of religious practices.
The case affirmed the right of journalists to critique religious and social issues without fear. It also boosted social reformers in India and led to increased scrutiny of the Vallabhacharya Sect.
