The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday restrained the state police from taking any coercive action against actor Ranveer Singh in connection with an FIR over his alleged imitation of a character from Kannada film ‘Kantara’, while verbally observing that the actor “had no right to do what he did” and should have exercised greater caution.
Justice M Nagaprasanna issued notice on Singh’s petition seeking quashing of the special complaint and subsequent FIR, and directed that no coercive steps should be taken against him till the next hearing on March 2.
Singh was booked on the orders of a Bengaluru court which accepted a private complaint filed by a city-based lawyer. He faces charges under Sections 196, 299 and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, including promoting enmity between religious groups, intentional acts intended to incite religious sentiments, and public mischief.
The High Commissioner made strong oral remarks on the responsibility of public figures. Referring to the alleged imitation, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that the act involved a sacred regional deity and that Singh should have been careful.
“You may be Ranveer Singh, or anyone else… but you cannot be loose-lipped,” the judge said.
While appearing for Singh, senior advocate Sajan Povaiya maintained that the actor had no intention of hurting anyone and that the “insensitive remark” he made during a film festival led to the filing of the complaint. He said that the crimes stipulated in Articles 196 and 302 of the National Services Law require deliberate intent, and that mere negligence will not give rise to criminal liability.
Povaya urged the court to watch the video of the speech, saying: “Watching it is believable,” and questioned whether Singh should be subject to criminal proceedings.
The court further noted that even in the absence of deliberate intent, an act can amount to “gross ignorance.”
“No person can disparage the religious sentiments of the people of the state,” the Supreme Court said. “You’re talking about a god, and imitating a god. Why the film was made, the explanation is there. But standing on stage you can’t take it lightly.”
Povaiya told the HC that Singh was ready to do whatever was necessary to “undo his recklessness” and added that the actor was Bengaluru’s “son-in-law” and had no intention of disrespecting the people of the city or the state.
The complainant’s counsel said that Singh continued to work despite his demand to stop, which the State also relied upon to oppose interim relief.
While the court made clear that it was not examining the merits of the case at this stage, it noted that the act appeared to be “intentional.”
“He (Singh) should have been very careful,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
In its order, the HC recorded that Singh, a “well-known actor”, participated in the 56th International Film Festival of India in Panaji, Goa, where he allegedly imitated the role of actor Rishabh Shetty in “Kantara Act One” and referred to the deity as a “female ghost”.
The court gave time to the state to submit its objections and reiterated that no coercive steps should be taken against Singh until the next hearing.
The complainant, Prashant Mithal, alleged that Singh mimicked the sacred expressions and behaviors associated with Bangurli and Gulija Daeva, spiritual deities worshiped in the coastal state of Karnataka, in a “crude and humorous manner”, and referred to the Daeva as a “female ghost”, thereby hurting religious sentiments.
In his plea, Singh maintained that his impersonation was an “honest tribute” to the film character, and that she had been wrongly given a “criminal colour”.
Singh had approached the HC on February 23 seeking quashing of the FIR and an interim stay of the proceedings. He has challenged the January 23 order of the Additional Chief Magistrate of Bengaluru, who took cognizance of the private complaint and directed the police to register an FIR.
