JioStar India Pvt. Ltd. has appealed a Kerala court’s decision to maintain an injunction halting the JioHotstar series Anali, allegedly inspired by the Koodathayi murders. According to a Live Law report. The Second Additional Sub Court in Ernakulam heard the appeal on October 13 and listed it for October 15, after recording the respondents’ appearance.
What is the dispute about?
The dispute concerns Jollyamma Joseph, also known as Jolly Joseph, who is accused of murdering six family members and is awaiting trial. She has argued that the series could damage her reputation and prejudice public opinion about her guilt.
In December 2025, Jolly approached the Kerala High Court seeking to stop the series from being released and promoted. On March 17, 2026, the court declined to examine the merits of her request, directing her to pursue the alternative remedy available under Rule 12 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, after JioHotstar rejected her complaint.
How the injunction was granted
Jolly subsequently filed a civil suit in Ernakulam. The Third Additional Munsiff Court granted an interim injunction on August 19, restraining the series’ release. Jiostar challenged the order, seeking to have the injunction lifted.
On September 18, the Kerala High Court directed the Munsiff Court to hear the pending applications promptly and issue an order within ten days of hearing the parties. However, on October 5, the lower court rejected Jiostar’s request to vacate the injunction and allowed Jolly’s application for a temporary injunction.
Jiostar then approached the High Court again, but the court indicated that the order could be challenged through an appeal. The company subsequently filed the present appeal before the Sub Court.
Jiostar challenges the court’s findings
Jiostar argued that the injunction was granted without examining the completed series or identifying specific scenes or dialogue that portrayed Jolly as guilty. Its appeal states: “The inference concerning portrayal has been drawn without the completed work being placed before, called for or viewed by the Hon’ble Munsiff Court. No particular scene, dialogue, sequence, narrative device or representation in the completed series has been identified as communicating a definitive conclusion concerning the 1st Respondent/Plaintiff’s guilt. The foundational material necessary to reach the conclusion embodied in the operative injunction was therefore absent,”
The company also argued that the trailer and third-party promotional reports could suggest a connection between Jolly and the fictional character but could not establish the overall effect of the series. It has further challenged the lower court’s application of mind while granting the injunction.
The Sub Court is scheduled to take up the appeal on October 15. The injunction remains in place pending further proceedings.
Read more:
- Rogue Websites on the Rise? JioStar, Warner Bros. File IP Cases Against Domains in Delhi HC
- JioStar wants fans to ask ChatGPT during live matches. Where does fans’ data go?
For You
- Read Reasoned by Nikhil Pahwa: How AI is changing our world
- Sign up for MediaNama's Daily Newsletter to receive regular updates
- Sponsor a MediaNama Event