Kangana Ranaut's Queen Forever Clears a Court Hurdle
A Bombay High Court order has cleared a hurdle for Kangana Ranaut's Queen Forever. What the court ruled, what outlets report and what is still pending.
The Bombay High Court has refused to stop the making of Queen Forever, the sequel to Kangana Ranaut's 2014 film Queen, while a dispute between two companies over the film's rights continues. The Times of India reported the order on Oct. 14, citing a Hindustan Times report. This is a dispute between businesses and Ranaut is not a party to it.
The order
According to the Times of India, Justice Sandeep Marne declined interim relief sought by Phantom Studios India Pvt Ltd in its dispute with Jiostar India Pvt Ltd, which is producing Queen Forever. The order lets work on the film continue for now. The Times of India adds that a final verdict has not been reached.
What Phantom Studios claims
In its lawsuit, Phantom Studios says it co-produced the original Queen and that it and Jiostar each own an equal 50 percent share of the intellectual property rights. It cites the co-production agreement, which it says gives both parties equal rights over derivative works, including sequels, prequels and remakes.
The studio says it never consented to a sequel or any other derived work. It also claims it sent multiple caution notices to Jiostar from April 2026, asking it to halt plans, and that Jiostar did not give details of the project. It asked the court to restrain Jiostar and its representatives from making, shooting, releasing or promoting a sequel under the titles Queen Forever or Queen 2 without its prior written consent. It also argued that urgency was needed because the film was reportedly scheduled for release in the coming months.
The Times of India attaches a disclaimer to its report: the details are allegations made by the parties as presented in a legal hearing, and they are not proven facts.
What is known about the film
Queen Forever is described as the official sequel to the 2014 comedy-drama, with Ranaut returning as Rani Mehra. The Times of India says it reunites her with director Vikas Bahl. The paper does not give a release date.
What the refusal means
A refusal of an interim injunction is a procedural decision made early in a case. It does not decide who owns the rights. It means the court was not persuaded, at this stage, to halt production while the arguments are heard. Both sides can continue to argue their positions at later hearings.
For readers, the practical meaning is that production can continue, and the legal question stays open. Jiostar's own arguments are not set out in the coverage we found, so our account of the dispute leans on Phantom Studios' side as described in the hearing report.
What we could not confirm
We could not confirm Jiostar's response, because the report we read does not give it. We could not confirm the film's release date, its shooting status or its full cast. We did not see the court order itself. We relied on the Times of India's summary of a Hindustan Times report, and we were not able to locate the original Hindustan Times piece. Ranaut has not been quoted on the matter in the coverage we reviewed. We could not confirm when the next hearing will be held.
Sources
*Cover photo: Flickr user 146461623@N05, Wikimedia Commons, *[*https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kangana_Ranaut_at_2019_Cannes.jpg*](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kangana_Ranaut_at_2019_Cannes.jpg)* (CC BY 2.0).*