Bengaluru High Court Issues Conditional Order Protecting Ranveer Singh from Police Action
The Bengaluru High Court on Tuesday passed a significant conditional ad interim order, directing city police to refrain from taking any coercive measures against Bollywood actor Ranveer Singh. This directive is contingent upon the actor's full cooperation with the ongoing investigation into a controversial incident.
Court's Stern Observations and Conditions
Justice M Nagaprasanna, while hearing the case, made pointed oral observations emphasizing that no individual, regardless of celebrity status, is above the law. "A superstar is not 'ooper' (above) law. You have no right to hurt people's sentiments. Being an actor, you influence people. Being a superstar, you must be responsible in making statements. You cannot be loose-tongued at all," Justice Nagaprasanna remarked.
The court has instructed the respondents to file their objections by Monday, which marks the next scheduled hearing date. This order provides temporary relief to Ranveer Singh while the legal process unfolds.
Background of the Controversial Incident
The controversy stems from an episode during a promotion event for Ranveer Singh's film 'Dhurandhar' at the International Film Festival of India in Goa last November. On stage, Ranveer allegedly mimicked actor Rishab Shetty's portrayal of a deity from the critically acclaimed Kannada film 'Kantara: Chapter 1'.
Following this incident, High Grounds police in Bengaluru registered a First Information Report (FIR) based on a complaint filed by Prashant Methal, a resident of HBR Layout. The complaint alleged that Ranveer's actions had hurt religious sentiments.
Legal Arguments Presented in Court
Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya, representing Ranveer Singh, submitted that his client had made an "completely insensitive, reckless statement" but had tendered an immediate apology for mimicking the Chamundi Daiva character. Poovayya argued that the magistrate's order directing the FIR registration lacked proper application of mind.
In response to these arguments, Justice Nagaprasanna delivered a memorable caution: "I may forget, you may forget, and people may forget. The internet never forgets." This statement highlighted the permanent nature of digital content and its potential consequences.
On the opposing side, the complainant's counsel characterized Ranveer's actions as a "shoot and scoot" attempt, suggesting the actor had made inflammatory remarks without considering their impact.
Ranveer Singh's Petition and Defense
In his petition before the High Court, Ranveer Singh challenged the FIR registered against him, claiming the complaint failed to disclose the commission of any offense at his instance. He contended that the January 23, 2026 order from the magistrate court directing FIR registration also suffered from non-application of mind.
The actor further argued that police had registered the FIR without conducting a proper preliminary inquiry. Importantly, Ranveer submitted that he had already tendered an unconditional apology, emphasizing his respect for all cultures, traditions, and communities in the country. He asserted that he had no intention of spreading hatred against any community through his actions.
Broader Implications and Next Steps
This case highlights the delicate balance between freedom of expression and respect for religious sentiments in India's cultural landscape. The conditional order represents a measured judicial approach, allowing investigation to proceed while preventing potentially excessive police action against the actor.
The court's decision to require objections by Monday sets the stage for further legal proceedings that will examine both the substantive allegations against Ranveer Singh and the procedural aspects of how the case was initiated. This development comes amid ongoing discussions about celebrity responsibility and the boundaries of artistic expression in India's diverse society.
