The Allahabad High Court has lambasted the makers of the movie, 'Adipurush', for their portrayal of religious characters, specifically Lord Rama and Lord Hanuman. The court said that the makers had put the tolerance of Hindus to the test with Adipurush. The court observed that the film's depiction of these characters was objectionable and questioned why the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) did not take appropriate action during the certification process.
The court made these remarks while addressing two Public Interest Litigation (PIL) pleas filed against the movie, which features Prabhas, Saif Ali Khan, and Kriti Sanon.
The makers argued that a disclaimer had been made that this movie was not an adaptation of the Ramayana, rather it was just inspired from the epic: "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 emphasized that sensitive religious scriptures should not be tampered with or disrespected. It clarified that the petitions were not propaganda but rather raised a genuine concern. The court noted that the movie portrayed Lord Hanuman, Lord Ram, Lord Laxman, and Sita in a derogatory manner as if they were insignificant. The court also slammed the Deputy Solicitor General of India who stood to defend the movie "despite its objectionable scenes and dialogues".
ALSO READ | Adipurush Dialogue Row: Nepal Court Lifts Ban On Hindi Films Including Prabhas, Kriti Sanon Starrer
During the hearing, the respondents said that some of the "objectionable" dialogues had been altered, but the court stressed that mere changes to the dialogues were insufficient and demanded actions regarding the scenes. The court stated that if the exhibition of the movie were to be halted, it would provide relief to those whose sentiments were hurt.
One of the petitioners' counsel pointed out that similar instances had occurred in movies like PK, Mohalla Assi, and Haider. The court allowed the application to include the movie's dialogue writer, Manoj Muntashir Shukla, as a party respondent in the PIL plea and directed notice to be issued to him.
The PIL, filed by social activists Kuldeep Tiwari and Bandana Kumar through their advocates Ranjana Agnihotri and Sudha Sharma in December last year, asserted that the movie cast aspersions on the characters of the epic Ramayana and tarnished the cultural heritage of Ayodhya and the Hindu religion as a whole. The litigation claimed that the movie's trailer was indecent and disrespectful, resulting in the hurting of religious sentiments among Hindus. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) was issued a notice by the Allahabad High Court in January, but no response was received from the board.
Recently, an amendment plea was filed, seeking to include the movie's dialogue writer, Manoj Muntashir Shukla, as a party respondent in the PIL plea. The amendment application objected to Shukla's dialogues, describing them as ridiculous, filthy, and demeaning to the glory of the Ramayana era. The plea accused Shukla of attacking the rich culture and ancient civilization of Sanatan Sanskriti and degrading the language of deities and the character of icons and role models. It claimed that the dialogues offended the Hindu community by inaccurately and inappropriately portraying religious characters, contrary to the works of authors such as Maharishi Valmiki and Saint Tulsidas.
The petitioners argued that the amendment plea was necessary due to the film's release, which had generated criticism and resentment across the country for its inaccurate and inappropriate portrayal of Hindu religious characters, including Ravana and Lord Hanuman. The plea highlighted that the film's portrayal of these characters deviated completely from Indian civilization. It specifically mentioned Saif Ali Khan's bearded look as Ravana, showing him consuming raw red meat and making a horrifying face, which was deemed an insult to Hindu civilization. The plea stressed that any alteration in the appearance of Hindu religious characters, such as hairstyle, beard, moustache, and clothing, according to the Ramayana, would hurt the sentiments of worshippers, devotees, and religious believers.
Consequently, the amendment plea requested the court to direct the opposing parties to remove the objectionable dialogues and scenes from the film that depicted religious characters in an offensive manner.
The Om Raut directorial has earned a little over Rs 277 crore so far since its June 16 release. Its single-day collection at the box office was around Rs 1.75 crore.