‘Basic structure of Valmiki Ramayana distorted, blasphemous depiction of deities’: PIL in SC seeks ban on Adipurush

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been moved in the Supreme Court seeking a ban on the movie ‘Adipurush’ for hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus. The PIL contends that the movie has depicted various deities by “destroying their fundamental values and characters” and modifying the basic structure of Valmiki Ramayana. The petitioner also objected to the movie’s dialogues, contending that only ‘gully boys’ use such ‘derogatory language.’

The PIL prays for the revocation of the censor certificate granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) on the grounds that it violates the statutory provisions u/s 5B of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.

The petitioner said, “The sacred fundamental texts and manuscripts are the basic spiritual and physical tenets of a cultured and civilized society which a common man of such a society relies [on] and lives [by]. A man becomes an orphan like a fallen leave from the branch of a tree without his culture and traditions,” before outlining her specific contentions.

The petitioner further claimed that the movie’s disclaimer was misleading. The petitioner further averred that various deities’ physical features and communication styles, including Bhagwan Ram and Bhagwan Hanuman, are complete distortions of “not only the characters but also the very fundamental values for which they are worshipped.” The petitioner also claimed that the depiction of Mata Sita in the movie is ‘inappropriate and vulgar.’

To support her contentions, the petitioner provided an example of dialogue by Bhagwan Hanuman, to rival Indrajeet, contending that such statements are not used in a ‘civilised society’ but by ‘gully boys.’

The PIL states, “The inspiration was taken from Valmiki Ramayana which was believed to have happened in Treta Yug in which the Rakshasas and Devas lived together on Earth and fought each other but still maintained the decorum of war and rivalry. Using derogatory words can never be an inspiration to anyone and such a distortion of such a great personality and deity like Lord Hanuman is blasphemy and this must be stopped.”

The petitioner argues that ‘Adipurush’ is a mockery of Valmiki Ramayana and is fuelled by interests in personal commercial gain. The petitioner contends that the movie has modified the core values of the deities. The petitioner said, “The whole story of the film has destroyed and modified every aspect of the core values of the characters, their language and each authentic event.”

The petitioner also contended that the movie, which was released on June 16, has been altered and modified after receiving CBFC certification and release, which is violative of Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act. The petitioner submitted, “Violation of this section is punishable by three years of imprisonment. No action has been taken by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for this violation till date.”

The petitioner concluded, “The Indian Constitution gives us the fundamental right to freely profess and practice our religion and belief with full devotion. But feature film ‘Adipurush’ has created a dent on the values, principles and personality of our sacred deities and Gods by distorting every aspect of [their] fundamental values and principles and hence this feature film ‘Adipurush’ has hurt our sentiments.”

Allahabad High Court Slams Makers of Adipurush

Notably, similar petitions have been filed before Allahabad, Delhi and Rajasthan High Courts as well. On June 27, the Allahabad High Court slammed the makers of ‘Adipurush’ for depicting religious characters, including Bhagwan Ram and Bhagwan Hanuman, in an objectionable manner, asking why the tolerance of Hindus was being put to a test.

The court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Shree Prakash Singh, said, “The one who is gentle should be suppressed? Is it so? It is good that it is about a religion, the believers of which did not create any public order problem. We should be thankful. We saw in the news that some people had gone to cinema halls (wherein the movie was being exhibited) and they only forced them to close the hall, they could have done something else as well.” The court added that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) should have done something while granting certification to the movie.

The court further remarked, “Agar hum log ispar bhi aankh band kar len kyonki yeh kaha jaata hai ki yeh dharm ke log bade sahishnu hain to kya uska test liya jayega? (If we close our eyes on this as well because it is said that people of this religion are very tolerant, so will it be put to a test?),” while hearing two PILs against the exhibition and dialogues of the movie.

The court further said that religious scriptures, towards which the people are sensitive, should not be touched or encroached upon. Furthermore, the court said that these PILs were not propaganda petitions, and that the bench is concerned with a genuine issue. The court said, “The issue here (in the PIL pleas) is that the way the movie has been made, there are some scriptures which are exemplary and are worthy of worship. People recite Ramcharitmanas before leaving their homes.”

The court remarked that the movie depicted Bhagwan Ram, Bhagwan Laxman, Bhagwan Hanuman and Mata Sita were depicted in an objectionable manner as if they were nothing. The court further rapped the respondent’s contentions that a disclaimer was added to the movie and said, “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 asked the Dy Solicitor General how he would defend the movie considering it contains prima facie objectional scenes and dialogues. However, the court asked the Dy Solicitor General to seek instructions in the matter from a competent authority. The Dy Solicitor General argued that the objectionable scenes and dialogues in the movie have been changed, however, the court responded, “That alone won’t work. What will you do with the scenes? Seek instructions, then we will definitely do whatever we want to do…In case the exhibition of the movie is stopped, then the people whose feelings have been hurt, will get relief.”