Bombay High Court quashes 2010 FIR against Shekhar Suman and Bharti Singh over comedy show remarks

The Bombay High Court has quashed a 2010 FIR registered against actor Shekhar Suman and comedian Bharti Singh over alleged remarks made during a television comedy show, ruling that no offence of hurting religious sentiments was established.

The case was registered at Pydhonie Police Station under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, along with Section 34, which relates to common intention. A representative of the Raza Academy had filed the complaint following an episode of Comedy Circus Ka Jadoo that aired in November 2010.

Justice Amit Borkar allowed separate petitions filed by Shekhar Suman and Bharti Singh seeking cancellation of the FIR and all related proceedings. While delivering the order, the court observed that the television programme was meant for light entertainment and should be viewed in the proper context.

The High Court stated that a comedy show cannot be judged in the same way as a serious speech, religious discourse, or political statement. It noted that performances in such formats should be considered as a whole instead of isolating a few words or expressions.

The court further clarified that for an offence under Section 295-A to be made out, there must be both deliberate and malicious intent to insult religious sentiments. According to the bench, both conditions are necessary, and if either one is missing, the offence is not complete.

After reviewing the available material, the court found no evidence to suggest that either Shekhar Suman or Bharti Singh had any intention to insult any religion. It also said that merely because some viewers may have felt offended would not be enough to justify criminal prosecution.

The bench also considered the specific roles of the two artists. It noted that Shekhar Suman was serving as a judge on the show, while Bharti Singh was performing as part of a scripted comic act. There was no material indicating any shared plan or common intention between them.

Additionally, the High Court pointed out that the prosecution had failed to obtain prior sanction under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a mandatory requirement for prosecuting offences under Section 295-A.

Rejecting the State’s argument that the matter should proceed to trial, the court held that a trial cannot replace the need for a legally valid case. It concluded that continuing criminal proceedings in the absence of required ingredients would amount to misuse of the legal process.

With this ruling, the FIR and all consequential proceedings against Shekhar Suman and Bharti Singh have been set aside.

Also Read: “Your talent should be your drug,” Shekhar Suman condemns Bharti Singh

Bombay High Court dismisses PIL seeking change in Raja Shivaji’s title

The Bombay High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought a stay on the theatrical release of the Marathi-Hindi bilingual film Raja Shivaji, clearing the way for the movie’s scheduled release on May 1, 2026. The petition had objected to the omission of the honorific “Chhatrapati” from the film’s title and claimed it was disrespectful to the legacy of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.

The plea was filed by NGO Sree Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Foundation, which argued that leaving out the title “Chhatrapati” hurt the sentiments of followers of the iconic Maratha ruler. The petitioner requested the court to direct the makers to rename the film Chhatrapati Raja Shivaji and also sought restrictions on the release, screening, and public exhibition of the movie until changes were made.

A division bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad rejected the petition, observing that the matter did not involve any real public cause. The court also noted the timing of the plea, pointing out that it was filed only two days before the film’s release.

According to the bench, there was nothing in the title Raja Shivaji that could be considered insulting or derogatory to the status of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. The judges stated that the petition appeared to be motivated rather than filed in genuine public interest.

The respondents in the case included the Union of India, the State of Maharashtra, the Central Board of Film Certification, actor-director Riteish Deshmukh, producers Jyoti Deshpande, Genelia Deshmukh, and Mumbai Film Company Pvt Ltd.

During the hearing, counsel representing the film’s producers informed the court that the story focuses on Shivaji Maharaj’s life before his coronation in 1674, when he officially received the title of “Chhatrapati.” It was also stated that a disclaimer explaining this context had already been included in the film and approved by the CBFC.

The producers further submitted that the project had been publicly announced in February 2024, while its release date was declared in 2025, meaning the title had long been in the public domain.

In its final remarks, the High Court said public interest litigation was meant to amplify genuine public concerns, and not be misused for such last-minute objections.

Also Read: Raja Shivaji Box Office Prediction: Riteish Deshmukh’s film to open HUGE, take comfortable DOUBLE DIGIT opening