A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court claiming that the film title “Ghooskhor Pandat” is casteist, offensive, and promotes religious stereotyping. The petitioner has sought an immediate restraint on the film’s release, alleging threats to communal harmony and constitutional values.
A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking an immediate stop on the release and public screening of the upcoming Hindi film “Ghooskhor Pandat”. The petition alleges that the movie promotes caste-based and religion-based stereotyping and poses a serious threat to public order, communal harmony, and constitutional values.
The PIL has been moved under Article 32 of the Constitution through Advocate-on-Record Vinod Kumar Tewari. It has been filed by Atul Mishra, who is the National Organisation Secretary of the Brahman Samaj of India (BSI).
ALSO READ: Brahmin Pe Mootoonga Remark| Surat Court Issues Notice To Anurag Kashyap, Seeks Response
The petition has been filed in a representative capacity on behalf of the organisation and seeks a writ of mandamus or any other suitable directions against the Union of India, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), as well as the producer and director of the film.
According to the petitioner, the title and storyline of the film are prima facie offensive and defamatory towards the Brahmin community. The petition strongly objects to the use of the word “Pandat”, which is a caste- and religion-identifying title, along with the word “Ghooskhor”, a term commonly used to describe bribery and moral corruption.
The plea argues that the combination of these two words directly creates a negative stereotype against an identifiable religious community.
The petitioner submits that while criticism of corruption is constitutionally permissible, the selective use of a caste-linked religious identifier is unnecessary and unjustified. It is alleged that such depiction amounts to deliberate community stigmatization, violates the right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution, infringes religious freedoms protected under Articles 25 and 26, and results in discriminatory treatment in violation of Article 14.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court: “People Protect Their Own Caste but Show Little Respect for Others”
The plea further states that if the film is allowed to be released and screened in its present form, it is likely to hurt religious sentiments, provoke communal disharmony, and disturb public order across the country. In this context, the petition invokes Articles 14, 19(2), 21, 25, and 51A(e) of the Constitution.
It highlights that the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute and can be subjected to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, decency, morality, and national integrity.
Serious allegations have also been raised against the CBFC in the petition. The petitioner claims that the statutory body either failed to properly examine the film’s content or acted in an arbitrary manner while granting certification.
It is argued that the CBFC has a constitutional and statutory duty under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 to ensure that certified films do not promote contempt, ridicule, or hatred against any community, do not unnecessarily hurt religious sentiments, and do not reinforce caste-based prejudice under the garb of satire or creative expression.
The petition also provides details about the Brahman Samaj of India, describing it as a 28-year-old registered charitable and social organisation. The organisation claims to represent Brahmins in India and abroad and is registered under the Firms and Societies Act.
ALSO READ: Anurag Kashyap in Legal Trouble: Surat Court Summons Him Over Brahmin Remarks
It also enjoys Section 80G status under the Income Tax Act and is registered on the DARPAN portal. According to the plea, the organisation has been actively involved in social welfare activities such as education, healthcare, and community development.
The petitioner has clarified that the PIL has not been filed for any personal gain or private interest but purely in the larger public interest. The plea emphasises that the issue concerns public peace, communal harmony, constitutional order, and national unity. It is also stated that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen who is actively engaged in social causes.
The matter has not yet been listed for hearing before the Supreme Court.
Case Title:
Atul Mishra v. Union of India & Ors.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Justice Yashwant Varma
