K’taka HC restrains state police from coercive action against Ranveer Singh

THe mysore heights margaret court on tues unemotional the State police from taking any coercive steps against actor Ranveer Singh in connection with an FIR registered over his alleged mimicry of a character from the Kannada film Kantara, while at the same time orally observing that the actor “had no right to do what he has done” and should have exercised greater caution.Justice M Nagaprasanna also issued notice on Singh’s petition seeking quashing of the private complaint and consequent FIR against him.The judge directed the State not to take coercive action against Singh until the matter is heard next on March 2.Singh was booked by the police following orders of a Bengaluru court that had accepted a private compliant made by a city-based lawyer. The actor is facing charges of promoting enmity between religious groups, deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, and public mischief, under Sections 196, 299, and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.On Tuesday, Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya, who appeared for Singh, told the Court that Singh had not intended to hurt anyone through his actions and that an “insensitive statement” made at a film festival had resulted in the complaint.Poovayya argued that for offences under Sections 196 and 302 of the BNS, there must be a deliberate intention to cause discomfort or outrage religious feelings, and contended that mere carelessness would not attract the provisions. He also urged the Court to view the video of the speech, saying “seeing it is believing,” and questioned whether Singh should be subjected to the rigours of criminal proceedings.During the hearing, the Court however, made strong oral observations on the need for public figures to act responsibly. Referring to the alleged mimicry by Singh, Justice Nagaprasanna said that the act involved a sacred regional deity and the actor should have been cautious.“You may be Ranveer Singh, you may be anybody... You cannot be loose-tongued,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.The Court further said that even if there had not been any deliberate intent, the act could amount to “gross ignorance.”“Religious sentiments of the people of the State cannot be taken for a ride by anybody,” the high court said. “You are speaking of a diety, mimicking of a diety. Why the film was made, the explanation is there. But standing on a stage you cannot take it so lightly,” it said.Poovayya then said that Singh was willing to do anything that was needed to “undo his recklessness.” He also added that Singh was “Bengaluru’s son-in-law,” and that he had not intended any disrespect to the people of city and the State.The complainant’s counsel argued that Singh had continued despite being asked to stop, a contention the State also relied upon to oppose relief.The Court then said that while it was not going into merits and concluding the case at the present stage, that the act in question seemed to be “deliberate.”“He (Singh) should have been very, very careful,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.The Court then recorded in its order that Singh, a “well-known actor,” had participated in the 56th International Film Festival of India organised by the Government of Goa, and was alleged to have mimicked another actor, Rishabh Shetty’s, role in Kantara Chapter 1 and that he had referred to a deity as a “female ghost.”The Court granted time to the State to file objections and directed that “no coercive steps” be taken against Singh until the next date of hearing.Singh had moved the High Court on February 23, seeking quashing of the FIR and an interim stay on all proceedings against him in the case.Singh has challenged an order passed on January 23 this year, by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, taking cognisance of the private complaint made against him and directing the police to register an FIR.The complaint pertains to Singh’s reaction to the Kannada film ‘Kantara’ and his remarks on, and mimicry of a character from the film during the closing ceremony of IFFI in November last year.The complainant, Prashant Methal had approached the local court claiming that at the IFFI stage, Singh performed an act in which he mimicked the sacred expressions and mannerisms associated with Panjurli and Guliga Daiva, spiritual deities worshipped in coastal Karnataka, in a “crude and humorous way.” The complainant also claimed at the time that Singh referred to Daiva as a “female ghost” during the event, and that this conduct hurt the religious sentiments of devotees.Singh however, has said in his petition that his mimicry of a character from the film was an “honest appreciation” that had wrongly been given a “criminal colour”.