Supreme Court to hear plea against 4 states, Karni Sena for violence over ‘Padmaavat’1 min read . Updated: 25 Jan 2018, 12:59 PM IST
The Supreme Court will hear Congress supporter Tehseen Poonawalla's plea seeking action against governments of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear on Monday two separate petitions seeking contempt action against four state governments and the Shree Rashtriya Rajput Karni Sena for violating its order allowing the all-India release of controversial Bollywood movie Padmaavat.
One contempt petition has been filed by Congress supporter Tehseen Poonawalla, seeking action against governments of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh for their alleged failure in containing mobs protesting the release of the Deepika Padukone-starrer Padmaavat.
Another similar petition has been filed by lawyer Vineet Dhanda seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against Karni Sena and its office-bearers for allegedly holding violent protest against the movie in several states.
“All fresh petitions will be taken up on Monday," a bench comprising chief justice Dipak Misra and justices A. M. Khanwilkar and D. Y. Chandrachud said. Both petitions referred to the various apex court orders allowing exhibition of movie in theatres across India with the observation that maintaining law and order is the duty of the state governments.
Initially, the apex court had trashed several petitions seeking a stay on Padmaavat’s release on various grounds. Then the producers moved the court after certain states banned the movie based on the saga of a historic 13th century battle between Maharaja Ratan Singh and his army of Mewar and Sultan Alauddin Khilji of Delhi.
The movie also feature Shahid Kapoor and Ranveer Singh in the lead roles. The court, on 18 January, set aside the ban and restrained other states from banning the movie, paving way for its all-India release on 25 January.
Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh had moved the apex court seeking recall of the SC order, which was dismissed on 23 January.