Today in New Delhi, India
Nov 20, 2018-Tuesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Amid Padmavati row, SC says can’t put curbs on freedom of speech of filmmakers, writers

The Supreme Court made this observation while rejecting a petition against the release of the film An Insignificant Man based on Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal.

india Updated: Nov 16, 2017 16:11 IST
Indo Asian News Service, New Delhi
Padmavati,Supreme Court,‪Shri Rajput Karni Sena‬‬
Rejecting the petition against Arvind Kejriwal’s film, which will be released on November 17, a Supreme Court bench said that courts should be slow in passing restrain order as there can’t be curbs on the freedom of speech and expression.(Sonu Mehta/HT File Photo)

Filmmakers and writers should be allowed to enjoy freedom of speech and expression and there can’t be restrictions put on this, the Supreme Court said on Thursday as it rejected a petition seeking to block the release of film An Insignificant Man based on Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal.

Saying filmmakers and writers should be allowed to enjoy freedom of speech and expression, the SC stressed all creative people have the right to enjoy their works in production of films and dramas.

The court’s observation comes amidst countrywide protests over Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s latest film, Padmavati, for allegedly distorting the depiction of its main character.

The Rajput community has alleged that the film depicts an “amorous relationship” between Padmavati – portrayed by Deepika Padukone — and Alauddin Khilji — played by Ranveer Singh. Bhansali and his team have, however, dismissed the claims on several occasions.

Rejecting the petition against Kejriwal’s film, which will be released on November 17, the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud said: “Courts should be extremely slow in passing restrain order” as there can’t be curbs on the freedom of speech and expression.

Petitioner Nachiketa Walhakar had allegedly thrown ink on Kejriwal in 2013. He told the court that the video of that incident was being shown as part of promotion of the film.

First Published: Nov 16, 2017 15:46 IST