38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, February 12, 2026
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

gauhati-hc-quashes-case-against-influencer-who-claimed-assamese-women-practise-black-magic-and-convert-men-into-animals
Trending Judiciary
Gauhati HC Quashes Case Against Influencer Who Claimed Assamese Women Practise Black Magic and Convert Men Into Animals [Read Order]

Gauhati High Court quashes case against influencer Abhishek Kar over remarks on black magic in Assam, holds offences under BNS, IT Act not made out.

11 February, 2026 03:08 PM
high-courts-cannot-nullify-arbitration-proceedings-while-substituting-arbitrators-sc
Trending Judiciary
High Courts Cannot Nullify Arbitration Proceedings While Substituting Arbitrators: SC [Read Order]

Supreme Court rules High Courts cannot nullify arbitration proceedings while appointing substitute arbitrators under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act.

11 February, 2026 03:58 PM

TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email