38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, December 15, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
CelebStreet

Allahabad HC refuses Anticipatory bail for head of Amazon Prime Video in 'Tandav' case

By Namya Bose      28 February, 2021 12:28 PM      0 Comments
Allahabad HC refuses Anticipatory bail for head of Amazon Prime Video in 'Tandav' case

The Anticipatory bail plea by the head of Amazon Prime Videos in India, Aparna Purohit, was declined by the Allahabad High Court this Thursday ( February 25, 2021).

The petitioner was accused of inappropriate depiction of Uttar Pradesh police personnel, Hindu deities as well as an adverse portrayal of a character playing the PM in the web series Tandav in the ongoing investigation against the show.

Justice Siddarth observed that though Purohit was granted interim protection previously on a similar issue, she is seen not to be co-operative hence the bail on this occasion stands rejected by the HC. 

The Counsel representing the State Government put forth their argument, bringing to notice that a total of 4 criminal complaints and 10 FIRs have been filed all across the country regarding the same web series. It was not just one person being effected, rather several persons all around the country felt offended by the content and therefore lodged such complaints. 

The State counsel added, "It is not a stray case of some over-sensitive individual lodging the FIR against the applicant and other co-accused persons regarding objectionable character and content of the web series in dispute.

The petitioner, Aparna Purohit, in her plea, submitted that the web series was made with no intention of offending anyone or outraging religious sentiments of any community but was a mere work of fiction.

After deliberation, the Court commented, The basic philosophy of the Constitution is to permit the people of all faith to practice, profess and propagate their religion freely without hurting or acting against the people who profess or practice different religious faith than theirs. Therefore, it is an onerous duty of every citizen to respect the feelings of the people of other faith even while making a fiction.

Giving example of Western filmmakers, the Court observed, Western filmmakers have refrained from ridiculing Lord Jesus or the Prophet but Hindi filmmakers have done this repeatedly and still doing this most unabashedly with the Hindu Gods and Goddesses , adding that, the scenes in dispute are likely to cause disturbance and threats to public order. The reference to Hindu Gods and Goddesses in the scenes in dispute in berating light cannot be justified.

The Court showed concern in the rising instances of such tendencies of insensitivity by the Hindu Film Industry, the judgement reading, This tendency on the part of the Hindi film industry is growing and if not curbed in time, it may have disastrous consequences for the Indian social, religious and communal order. There appears to be a design behind such acts on the part of the people who just give a disclaimer in all the films and depict things in the movies which are really religiously, socially and communally offensive in nature. The young generation of the country, which is not much aware of the social and cultural heritage of this country, gradually starts believing what is shown in the movies by the people like the accused persons in the present movie in dispute and thereby, it destroys the basic concept of the survival of this country having tremendous diversity of all kinds as a united nation. The film industry in the south has not indulged in such acts like the Hindi film industry."

The court declared, Her fundamental right of life and liberty cannot be protected by grant of anticipatory bail to her in the exercise of discretionary powers of this Court. 

It was noted that the petitioner has not acted responsible by allowing to stream a web series that seems to go against the Fundamental rights of the majority in the country thus making her open to possible criminal prosecution.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

ranveer-singhs-dhurandhar-barred-from-release-across-gulf-states-amid-content-sensitivity-concerns
Trending CelebStreet
Ranveer Singh’s Dhurandhar Barred from Release Across Gulf States Amid Content Sensitivity Concerns

Ranveer Singh’s Dhurandhar fails to secure release approval in six GCC countries amid concerns over politically sensitive content.

14 December, 2025 12:40 AM

TOP STORIES

scwla-hails-supreme-courts-historic-30-reservation-for-women-in-state-bar-councils-a-landmark-leap-for-gender-parity-in-the-legal-profession
Trending Legal Insiders
SCWLA Hails Supreme Court’s Historic 30% Reservation for Women in State Bar Councils: A Landmark Leap for Gender Parity in the Legal Profession [Read Press Release]

Supreme Court orders 30% reservation for women in State Bar Councils; SCWLA welcomes the landmark verdict as a major step toward gender equality in the legal profession.

09 December, 2025 04:45 PM
only-central-state-employees-fall-under-section-2e-gratuity-exclusion-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Only Central, State Employees Fall Under Section 2(e) Gratuity Exclusion: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court rules KSBC retired abkari workers are entitled to gratuity, holding that Section 2(e) exclusion applies only to government employees.

09 December, 2025 08:28 PM
civic-bodies-have-authority-to-revise-property-tax-rates-courts-cannot-substitute-judgment-on-policy-decisions-sc
Trending Judiciary
Civic Bodies Have Authority to Revise Property Tax Rates; Courts Cannot Substitute Judgment on Policy Decisions: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court upholds municipal autonomy to revise property tax rates, ruling that courts cannot interfere in policy decisions absent arbitrariness or illegality.

09 December, 2025 08:35 PM
hostile-witness-testimony-cannot-be-rejected-in-toto-supreme-court-reiterates-settled-legal-position
Trending Judiciary
Hostile Witness Testimony Cannot Be Rejected in Toto: Supreme Court Reiterates Settled Legal Position [Read Judgment]

Hostile witness testimony cannot be rejected entirely, the Supreme Court held, reaffirming that credible portions supporting prosecution or defence must still be considered.

09 December, 2025 08:44 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email