New Delhi: The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition seeking a stay on the release of the Netflix film “Ghooskhor Pandat” after the streaming platform informed the court it would change the title and had already withdrawn promotional material from social media.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav took on record the submissions made on behalf of Netflix that the impugned title would no longer be used and all promotional content bearing the earlier name had already been taken down.
Observing that no further directions were required in view of the stand taken by the streaming platform, the Delhi High Court disposed of the petition.
The petition, filed through advocate Vineet Jindal, had challenged the proposed release of the film on the grounds that the title “Ghooskhor Pandat” was defamatory and communally offensive, alleging that it maliciously associates the term “Pandat” with corruption and bribery, thereby harming the dignity and reputation of the Brahmin community.
In the writ petition, the petitioner, Mahender Chaturvedi, had contended that the term “Pandat” is “historically, culturally, and religiously associated with the Brahmin community and with Acharyas, symbolising scholarship, ethical conduct, spiritual guidance, and moral authority”, and that its use in the impugned title amounts to “collective defamation, stereotyping, and vilification of an entire religious and social community”.
“The impugned title maliciously associates the word ‘Pandat’ with corruption and bribery, thereby attacking the dignity, reputation, and vocation of the petitioner and the community to which he belongs,” the plea stated.
The petition further argued that the proposed content violates Articles 14, 21 and 25 of the Constitution, asserting that while freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) is constitutionally protected, it does not extend to hate speech, defamation, or content that disturbs communal harmony.
“Freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute and does not extend to hate speech, defamation, or content disturbing communal harmony and public order,” the plea said.
It was also alleged that the absence of effective regulatory intervention in the OTT space enables platforms to promote “sensationalism and community-based vilification for commercial gain”, and that failure to act would amount to an abdication of constitutional duty to protect fraternity, secularism, and public order.
Actor Manoj Bajpayee, reacting to the objections about the name of the film, sought to clarify that the movie is not a remark on a particular community.
More Entertainment News on www.mediaeyenews.com
IANS File Photo
–IANS
