🗓️ Date: July 29, 2025
📍 Location: Jalandhar, Punjab
What’s the Whole Matter?
Back in 2017, actor Rajkummar Rao appeared in a poster for his film Behen Hogi Teri, dressed as Lord Shiva while riding a motorcycle. Sitting behind him was co-star Shruti Haasan. This poster angered a local complainant, who filed a legal case alleging that religious sentiments were hurt by the portrayal.
For years, the case remained inactive, but recently, a non-bailable warrant was issued against Rao, bringing the matter back into the spotlight.
Court Appearance & Bail
On July 29, 2025, Rajkummar Rao appeared in a Jalandhar court and surrendered himself.
The court granted him bail with certain conditions.
Along with Rajkummar Rao, the film’s director, producer, and actress Shruti Haasan are also named in the case.
What Did Rajkummar’s Legal Team Say?
Rao’s legal team stated that:
The poster in question was part of the official promotional material for the movie, which was approved by the CBFC (Central Board of Film Certification).
The intention was not to hurt anyone’s religious beliefs.
It was purely part of creative expression within the context of the movie.
Next Court Hearing
The court has scheduled the next hearing on August 8, 2025, where it will be decided whether the case should proceed or be dismissed.
Why Is This Case Important?
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| 🎞️ Film | Behen Hogi Teri (2017) |
| 🧑🎤 Actor | Rajkummar Rao |
| 🙏 Charge | Hurting religious sentiments |
| 🧾 IPC Section | 295A (Deliberate insult to religion) |
| ⚖️ Court’s Decision | Bail granted, next hearing on August 8 |
🎞️ Controversy Originated from a Promotional Poster
In the promotional campaign for the film Behen Hogi Teri, a poster showing Rajkummar Rao dressed as Lord Shiva created public outrage.
Some individuals and religious groups filed complaints, claiming the portrayal was disrespectful to Hindu religious sentiments.
📜 Legal Charges Filed
A complaint was registered under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
The FIR named not just the actor but also the director, producer, and other crew members.
🏛️ Why Did He Surrender?
The court had sent multiple notices to Rajkummar Rao, but he allegedly failed to appear.
As a result, a non-bailable arrest warrant was issued.
Rao then voluntarily surrendered in court and applied for bail, which was accepted.
⚖️ The Larger Debate: Artistic Freedom vs. Religious Sentiment
This case has reignited a wider debate in Indian media and legal circles:
| Topic | Views |
|---|---|
| 🎨 Artistic Freedom | Supporters argue that artists should be free to express themselves creatively. |
| 🙏 Religious Respect | Others believe religious figures should not be depicted casually or disrespectfully. |
| ⚖️ Legal Balance | Section 295A is intended to protect religion, but can also be misused to target creative content. |
👨👩👧 Public and Social Media Reactions
The public is divided on social media:
Some people support Rajkummar Rao, saying the case is outdated and unnecessary.
Others feel filmmakers should exercise more sensitivity when dealing with religious subjects.
What’s Next?
The next hearing will take place on August 8, 2025.
The court will decide whether the case should move forward or be dropped.
Meanwhile, Rao and his team have also filed a petition to quash the FIR in higher courts.
This case shows that:
While creative freedom is vital in cinema and art,
Religious beliefs in a country like India must also be respected.
The situation also reminds us how old legal cases can resurface and affect celebrities years later. All eyes are now on the next hearing to see whether Rajkummar Rao walks away free or faces a full trial.
