In a Public Interest Litigation filed before the Gujarat High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to suspend the exhibition of the film “Sultan” in the state of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court has dismissed such writ petition and has not granted relief to the petitioner.
The petitioner has mentioned and quoted Salman Khan while speaking with reporters of NDTV News Channel in connection with the release of his new film “Sultan”, in which he made a remark that his training for the role of a wrestler in the said film was so grueling that he felt like a raped woman.
The petitioner also stated that such irresponsible and reckless statement or remark made by Salman Khan, who is a well-known cine actor will have serious impact on the minds of the victims of sexual harassment, more particularly women and, therefore, he prayed before the court that appropriate directions be issued to suspend the exhibition of the film “Sultan” in the State of Gujarat.
Dismissing the petition, the court held,
“6. We have gone through the contents of the petition and the material produced along with the same. Even according to the case of the petitioner, there is no allegation of any unwarranted remark made in the film “Sultan”. The only allegation made in the petition is that while speaking with the reporters of the TV news channel NTDV, the 1st respondent has made remark that the training for the role of a wrestler in the film was so gruelling that he felt like a raped woman. In the absence of any allegation or any remark or obscenity in the film itself, there is no reason for directing suspension of exhibition of the film “Sultan”. The remark made by the 1st respondent is not forming part of the film and in absence of such remark made in the film itself, we do not find any reason or justification in the claim of the petitioner to suspend the very exhibition of the film itself. With regard to such comment made by the 1st respondent, it is open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps against the 1st respondent in accordance with law.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any reason to grant any relief as prayed for by the petitioner, the writ-petition is accordingly dismissed. However, we make it clear that this Court has not gone into the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made by the petitioner against the 1st respondent…”
The PIL was filed by Aaditya Kiritbhai Raval who is a public-spirited individual, a social worker and also National President of Vishwa Hindustani Sangathan, which is engaged in social work since 1980, conducting movements for the enforcement of constitutional rights and statutory rights of citizens of India and also engaged in fighting for equality and removing discrimination on the grounds of religion, caste or gender.
