The Allahabad High Court today has observed as to why the tolerance level of a particular religion (referring to Hindus) was being put to the test by them. Slamming the makers of the movie Adipurush for portraying religious characters including Lord Rama and Lord Hanuman in an objectionable manner.
“The one who is gentle should be suppressed? Is it so? It is good that it is about a religion, the believers of which did not create any public order problem. We should be thankful. We saw in the news that some people had gone to cinema halls (wherein the movie was being exhibited) and they only forced them to close the hall, they could have done something else as well,” the bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Shree Prakash Singh orally remarked while noting that the CBFC should have done something while granting certificate in the matter.
“Agar hum log ispar bhi aankh band kar len kyonki yeh kaha jaata hai ki yeh dharm ke log bade sahishnu (Tolerant) hain to kya uska test liya jayega? (If we close our eyes on this issue also, because it is said that the people of this religion are very tolerant, so will it be put to test?),” the bench further remarked.
These significant observations were made by the Court while dealing with 2 Public Interest Litigation (PIL) pleas filed against the exhibition and dialogues of the Prabhas, Saif Ali Khan and Kriti Sanon starrer movie.
Noting that religious scriptures, towards which people are sensitive, should not be touched or encroached upon, the bench stressed that the petitions before it were not at all Propanda Peititons and that they were concerned with a genuine issue.
“The issue here (in the PIL pleas) is that the way the movie has been made, there are some scriptures which are exemplary and are worthy of worship. People recite Ramcharitmanas before leaving their homes.”
During the course of the hearing, the bench further noted as to how Lord Hanuman, Lord Rama, Lord Laxman, Sita Maa were depicted as if they were nothing.
Regarding the argument of the respondents that a disclaimer had been added in the film, the bench said thus: “Do the people who put the disclaimer consider the countrymen, and youth to be brainless? You show Lord Rama, Lord Laxman, Lord Hanuman, Ravana, Lanka and then say it is not Ramayana?”
The Court questioned the Deputy Solicitor General of India as to how would he defend the movie when it contains prima facie objectionable scenes and dialogues. The Court, however, asked him to seek instructions in the matter from the competent authority.
Further, when the Dy. SGI informed the bench that certain objectionable dialogues of the movie have been changed, the bench responded thus: “That alone won’t work. What will you do with the scenes? Seek instructions, then we will definitely do whatever we want to do…In case the exhibition of the movie is stopped, then the people whose feelings have been hurt, will get relief.”
Before the Court, Counsel for one of the petitioners, Ranjana Agnihotri pointed out that this was not the first time it has happened and that it had happened in movies such as PK, Mohalla Assi, Haider, etc.
Lastly, the Court allowed the application seeking to implead the dialogue writer of the movie Manoj Muntashir Shukla as party respondent in the PIL plea and directed for the issuance of notice to him.
Essentially, the Court was dealing with a PIL moved by Social Activists Kuldeep Tiwari and Bandana Kumar through advocates Ranjana Agnihotri and Sudha Sharma last year in December stating that the movie cast aspersion on the characters of the great epic Ramayana and tarnishes the image of the cultural heritage of Ayodhya and Hindu religion in general.
The plea further stated that the movie’s trailer is clumsy and indecent, which has resulted in hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus.
Though the HC, while hearing the matter in January this year, issued notice to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), no reply has been filed by the board in the matter.
Last week, an amendment plea was moved seeking the impleadment of the Film’s dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir Shukla as party respondent in the PIL plea.
The amendment application also objected to the dialogues written by Shukla terming them to be ‘ridiculous, ‘filthy’ and ‘against the glory of Ramayan yug’.
Manoj Muntashir has attacked Sanatan Sanskriti, and while writing dialogues of the film, he has completely destroyed the language of our deities, hampered character of our icons & role models…
It offends sentiments of Hindu Community by presenting the religious characters in an inaccurate and inappropriate manner that goes against descriptions found in the works of authors like Maharishi Valmiki & Saint Tulsidas” says the Amendment plea.
As per the petitioners, the occasion to file the amendment plea in the matter arose in view of the fact that the movie has now been released, thereby generating criticism and resentment from across the country due to inaccurate and inappropriate portrayal of Hindu religious characters including Ravana and Lord Hanuman.
“The portrayal of characters such as Ravana and Lord Hanuman in the film is completely divorced From Indian Civilisation. The bearded look of Ravan played by Saif Ali Khan in the Film is hurting the sentiments of the Hindu Community as the Brahmin Ravan is shown having raw red meat making a ghastly face in a wrong manner which is an insult to Hindu civilization,” the amendment plea avers.
The plea further states that any variation with the hairstyle, beard, moustache and dressing manner including appearances of the Hindu religious characters as per Ramayana is bound to hurt the sentiments of worshiper’s devotees and religious believers.
In this regard, the amendment plea prays for a direction to the opposite parties to remove the objectionable dialogues, and scenes from the film which depict the religious characters in an ugly manner.
The post Allahabad High Court slams maker of Adipurush for testing the tolerance level of Hindus appeared first on India Legal.
This is dummy text. It is not meant to be read. Accordingly, it is difficult to figure out when to end it. But then, this is dummy text. It is not meant to be read. Period.
Please don't enter any spam link in comment box ConversionConversion EmoticonEmoticon