Raveena Tandon, Farah Khan and others get temporary legal relief; here’s everything you need to know about case

by

Bollywood actress Raveena Tandon, filmmaker Farah Khan, and others involved have been granted a temporary reprieve in a five-year-old case that accused them of offending religious sensitivities. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has decided that they will not be required to attend any further investigations for now. The order stands until July 14, when the case is set to be heard again in court.

As an ardent admirer, I’m thrilled to share that following a communication from Justice Manisha Batra and her team about Punjab and other parties initiating inquiries under Section 35 of the BNS, the honorable Bench decided to put a halt on any such actions until our next court date. This was as reported by The Tribune.

A distinguished collection of legal experts, such as senior advocate Akshay Bhan and lawyers Abhinav Sood, Anmol Gupta, Mehndi Singhal, Sayyam Garg, Jay K Bhaardawaj, Arsh Bir Bhatti, Ishan Kshetarpal, and Harsh Gupta, took up the defense for the involved parties. The legal team argued before the court that the grounds for invoking Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code were not substantiated, as this section is designed to penalize acts deliberately intended to instigate religious offense.

For those who are not familiar with the situation, this case stems from a First Information Report (FIR) filed at the Ajnala police station on December 25, 2019. This report accuses several individuals such as comedian Bharti Singh, screenwriter Abbas Ajij Dalal, Frames Production Company, Raveena, and Farah, among others, of causing religious offense.

Multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) were filed against them in Punjab between 2019 and 2020, according to Hindustan Times. Lawyer Abhinav Sood stated that the dispute revolves around an episode of Farah Khan’s talk show Backbenchers. In this episode, celebrities were asked to define and spell words. Bharti allegedly misspelled a word on the show, and the petitioners claim that this mistake led to a misinterpretation, suggesting she was mocking a religion inappropriately.

In their argument, the legal team asserted that the allegations within the complaints were overstated and lacked substantiation, and they had no desire to offend anyone’s religious sensitivities. Essentially, they contended that the events portrayed in the show did not constitute an illegal act according to existing laws.

Previously, the High Court temporarily halted any arrests related to these FIRs (First Information Reports) in response to the petitions. Subsequently, some of those involved were summoned to aid the investigation. Yet, a new order from the court has postponed these summons as well. The next court hearing is scheduled for July 14, according to recent reports.

Read More

2025-04-29 11:37