A petition has been filed in the Delhi High Court seeking a stay on the release of Manoj Bajpayee’s Netflix film Ghooskhor Pandat. The plea claims the title is derogatory, amounts to collective defamation of the Brahmin community, and threatens communal harmony.
A petition has been filed before the Delhi High Court challenging the upcoming Netflix film titled Ghooskhor Pandat, alleging that the title and its promotional content are insulting and derogatory towards the Brahmin community.
According to the plea, the very name of the film creates a negative image by linking the word “Pandat” with corruption and bribery. The petitioner has argued that this association is not accidental but intentional, and it unfairly targets a well-known religious and social identity.
ALSO READ: Somnath Bharti’s Wife Lipika Mitra Sues FM Nirmala Sitharaman for Defamation
The petitioner, describing himself as a public-spirited citizen, has raised serious objections to what he calls the “communally offensive and defamatory nature” of the film. He has expressed concern that such content can cause widespread damage to the dignity, social standing, and reputation of the Brahmin community across the country.
In the petition, the Central government has been made a main party to the case. The petitioner has argued that the Centre has a constitutional and statutory responsibility to regulate digital and OTT platforms. He has claimed that the government must ensure that content which can harm social harmony or hurt community sentiments is not allowed to be circulated unchecked.
Seeking immediate relief, the petitioner has urged the High Court to intervene urgently. He has stated that he has formed a
“bona fide belief that the release of the film would amount to “collective defamation and hate speech” and could disturb communal harmony and public order.”
The petition has been filed by Advocate Vineet Jindal, who has requested the Delhi High Court to stay the release of the Netflix movie until the matter is fully examined by the court.
ALSO READ: Bihar Political Debate| Supreme Court Stays Defamation Case Against Aroon Purie
As per the plea, the repeated use of the word “Pandat” in the title and storyline of the film amounts to collective defamation. It argues that the film
“deliberately associates a well-recognised religious and social designation with corruption and bribery, thereby maligning and lowering the reputation of an entire community in the eyes of the public.”
The petition further claims that such portrayal violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 21, and 25 of the Constitution of India. It alleges that the content selectively targets a specific religious and social group, thereby violating the principles of equality, dignity, and freedom of religion.
The plea also highlights that while freedom of speech and expression is protected under Article 19(1)(a), it is not an unlimited right. It stresses that this freedom does not cover hate speech, defamation, or content that threatens social peace. The petitioner has argued that such restrictions are clearly permitted under Article 19(2) in the interest of public order, morality, and communal harmony.
Additionally, the petition states that creative freedom or artistic expression cannot be used as an excuse to spread harmful stereotypes or promote communal hatred. It argues that artistic liberty must come with responsibility, especially when the content is released on a mass platform with a wide public reach.
ALSO READ: Cross-Examination Begins in Rahul Gandhi Defamation Case at Sultanpur Court
The petitioner has also urged the Centre to take appropriate action against Netflix under the existing laws that govern digital media and OTT platforms, stating that unchecked circulation of such content can have serious consequences for social unity and constitutional values.
The matter is now before the Delhi High Court, which is expected to examine whether the film’s title and content cross the legal limits of free speech and whether interim relief, including a stay on release, is required.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Defamation
