Kangana Ranaut’s starrer ‘Emergency’, has once again found itself in controversy, as a Chandigarh district court issued notice to the actress and other respondents on Tuesday. They are accused of tarnishing the image of the Sikh community through the film’s portrayal of historical figures.
According to reports from PTI, the notice was filed by Advocate Ravinder Singh Bassi, who is also the president of the NGO Lawyers for Humanity. The respondents, including Ranaut and Zee Studios, have been directed to submit their replies by December 5.
The petition claims that Emergency misrepresents Sikhs, particularly by depicting the former Jathedar of Akal Takht Sahib as a terrorist. Bassi asserts that the filmmakers did not accurately represent historical facts, alleging that the trailer falsely suggests the Jathedar demanded a separate state, a claim he calls baseless and damaging.
“The accused without studying the proper historical facts and figures had portrayed Sikhs in bad shape and also made wrong and false allegations against the supreme temporal seat of the Sikh community as in the trailer of the movie it was shown that the sitting Jathedar of Sri Akal Takth Sahib was demanding separate state which is false and it was shown just to malign the image of Sikhs and the Akal Takth Jathedars,” Bassi alleged in the plea.
“That by this act and conduct of the accused, they hurt the sentiments and feelings of the Sikh community in general and the deponent,” the petition filed by Bassi, the former president of the District Bar Association, Chandigarh, said.
Bassi further alleged that “the actress, producer and director of the film ‘Emergency’, whose trailer has been released on the social media platform is a trouble creator and many times, created differences between communities by uttering provoking statements and speeches against the minorities”.
The petitioner has called for an FIR against Ranaut and two other respondents under several sections of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, including section 196(1) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 197(1) (punishment for making or publishing false or misleading information that could jeopardise India’s sovereignty, unity, integrity or security), 302 (uttering words with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings), and 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings).
As the controversy unfolds, there has yet to be a confirmed release date for ‘Emergency’. While anticipation for the film was initially high, the ongoing legal issues may further complicate its premiere.
