Why are Hindus tested every time? Allahabad HC asks on 'Adipurush' row

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Tuesday came down heavily on the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) over controversial dialogues and scenes in the movie Adipurush and wondered if the board understood its responsibilities.

The bench, comprising justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Shree Prakash Singh, also observed orally as to why a religion, which was said to be tolerant, was tested in this way.

"When the filmmaker has shown Lord Rama, Devi Sita, Lord Laxman, Lord Hanuman, Ravan, Lanka, etc., how will the disclaimer convince the people at large that the story is not from Ramayana," the vacation bench of justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Shree Prakash Singh said.

It asked Deputy Solicitor General S B Pandey to seek instructions as to whether the central government was contemplating reviewing the certificate granted by the CBFC for screening the movie.

Also Read | Why is Adipurush all wrong?

"Hindus are tolerant but why are they tested every time? When Hindus are civilised, is it correct to suppress them," the bench said.

It made the oral observations after a petitioner's lawyer Ranjana Agnihotri said that the movie may"not only affect adversely the sentiments of the people at large, who worship Lord Rama, Devi Sita, Lord Hanuman, etc., but the manner in which the character of Ramayana has been depicted would create serious disharmony in society also".

The court's remarks came while hearing two PILs, which contended that the film had portrayed religious characters like Lord Rama, Hanumana and others in an objectionable manner and had hurt the sentiments of the people who revered the Ramayana, a Hindu epic. The petitions have demanded a ban on the movie.

The court also allowed the plea to make the film's co-writer Manoj Muntashr Shukla a party in the matter and issued a notice to him directing him to respond within a week. The petitions have contended that Shukla's dialogues have portrayed the icons of Hindu religion in a very objectionable manner and that he had sought to justify the same in the garb of creative freedom.

Slamming the CBFC, the bench remarked that it seems that the Board was unable to understand its responsibilities. ''Cinema is the mirror of society....what do you (Board) want to teach the future generations?,'' it remarked.

The court did not appear to be satisfied by the removal of certain 'objectionable' dialogues from the movie following strong protests and sought to know what was to be done with the scenes.

(With PTI inputs)