Story of the film ‘Faraaz’: Why this tale of terrorism and bravery is under challenge in court

First, what happened in Dhaka in 2016?

Around 8.40 pm on July 1, 2016, five terrorists armed with assault rifles, grenades, and machetes stormed the Holey Artisan Bakery in Dhaka’s upscale Gulshan neighbourhood. The terrorists opened fire and took diners hostage, most of whom were foreigners.

They singled out the non-Muslims, and the final casualty list included nine Italian, seven Japanese, five Bangladeshis, and one Indian citizen. More than 50 others, mostly from Bangladeshi forces, were injured.

On the morning of July 2, after the terrorists killed two police officers, Bangladeshi special forces launched “Operation Thunderbolt”. At the end of the 12-hour standoff, the commandos stormed the bakery, killed all five terrorists, and rescued 13 hostages.

Hours after the attack, the Islamic State took responsibility. However, Bangladesh disputed this claim, and instead blamed the attack on the domestic extremist group Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen. Eight JuM members were put on trial, seven of whom were sentenced to death, while one was acquitted.

So why are the plaintiffs objecting to the film?

The mothers of the two victims have argued that the film may depict their daughters in a “bad light”, and that they would have to revisit the trauma all over again. They have argued that their “right to be left alone” supersedes the filmmaker’s right to commercially exploit the incident at the expense of their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“They (the petitioners) don’t want the broadcast, they don’t want spotlight. These are not celebrities, these are private persons who are grieving,” counsel for the petitioner said in the High Court, Live Law reported.

What happened in court?

In October 2022, a single judge Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna of the Delhi High Court rejected the plea, stating that the “right to privacy is essentially a right in personam and is not inheritable by the mothers/ legal heirs of the deceased persons”.

On Tuesday, a division Bench of the court comprising Justices Siddharth Mridul and Talwant Singh heard the petitioner’s challenge to the October order.

Senior advocate Akhil Sibal appearing for the petitioners alleged that the makers of the film have approached the matter with utter insensitivity. “The single judge holds that since the girls are now deceased, there can be no right to privacy in relation to their rights. This is a wrong proposition. The issue is whether the family members and the mothers, who are alive, have the right to privacy in relation to their daughters,” he argued.

Justices Mridul and Singh declined to stop the release of the film, but asked its makers to show it to the grieving mothers and resolve the issue. “We don’t know if the law permits us to injunct. All we are asking you to do is try and resolve this,” the court said. The judges also told the filmmakers that “they can’t profit out of someone else’s misery”, and listed the matter for further hearing on January 24.

And who is Faraaz in the title of the film?

Faraaz Ayaaz Hossain was one of the victims of the Holey Artisan Bakery massacre. He was the 20-year old scion of a prominent business family that owned the Transcomm group, a Bangladeshi conglomerate involved in a range of businesses from pharmaceuticals to newspapers.

Back from the US for summer holidays, he was at the Holey Artisan Bakery with two women friends from school — Abinta Kabir, 19, and Tarishi Jain, 18. It is the Abinta and Tarishi’s mothers who are currently engaged in the legal battle to stay the release of Faraaz.

Back in 2016, sources had told The Indian Express that the terrorists had given Faraaz the option to leave the captured establishment late on July 1 due to his faith and nationality. However, his companions, who were wearing western clothes, were not given that option. Faraaz refused to abandon his friends, and stayed on and even resisted the attackers, unarmed. His bravery and loyalty to his friends cost Faraaz his life.

“Faraaz was the only Bangladeshi who had no bullet injury. They used a knife on him. He must have resisted it with his hands,” Zarif, Faraaz’s older brother, had said in 2016.

In the days and months following the terror attack, Faraaz’s gallantry galvanised Bangladeshis against terrorism and bigotry. Signs saying “Faraaz is Bangladesh” were seen all over the country.