The Karnataka High Court on February 24 granted interim relief to Bollywood actor Ranveer Singh in connection with an FIR filed against him over alleged remarks linked to the depiction of a local deity in Kantara: Chapter 1. The court directed the State government not to take any coercive steps against the actor, provided he fully cooperates with the ongoing investigation.
The matter was heard by a single-judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna, who considered Singh’s petition seeking quashing of the FIR registered at the High Grounds Police Station in Bengaluru. The complaint relates to comments allegedly made by the actor during the closing ceremony of the International Film Festival of India held in Goa on November 28, 2025.
According to the complaint, Singh mimicked a sacred Daiva performance sequence from Kantara: Chapter 1, the acclaimed film directed by and starring Rishab Shetty. During the event, he allegedly referred to the revered Chavundi Daiva as a “female ghost” or “devil” while imitating the deity’s expressions. The act was viewed by some sections as disrespectful toward religious traditions deeply rooted in coastal Karnataka’s cultural identity.
A Bengaluru-based advocate filed a private complaint, following which police registered an FIR under Sections 196, 299, and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). These provisions deal with promoting enmity, deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, and related offences. Singh subsequently approached the High Court seeking relief, arguing that his remarks were misinterpreted and lacked any malicious intent.
Appearing for the actor, senior advocate Sajjan Poovayya submitted that Singh had expressed regret over what was described as an inappropriate statement. The defence maintained that the performance was meant as a tribute, reflecting admiration for Rishab Shetty’s powerful portrayal in the film, and not as mockery or insult. They argued that there was no deliberate intention to hurt religious sentiments.
While granting interim protection, the court made pointed oral observations about the responsibility carried by public figures. The bench remarked that whether one is a superstar or an ordinary citizen, sensitivity toward cultural and religious matters is essential. The judge observed that celebrities possess significant influence and must exercise caution while making public statements, especially in forums that attract national and global attention.
The court also highlighted the enduring impact of digital content, noting that even if public memory fades, the internet preserves every word and gesture. The observation underscored the broader concern about accountability in an era where public remarks can circulate widely within minutes.
The High Court’s order shields Singh from immediate arrest or coercive action, but the legal proceedings remain ongoing. The State and other respondents have been directed to file their objections, and the matter is scheduled for further hearing on March 2.
The controversy has sparked a wider debate around artistic expression, cultural reverence, and the boundaries of public commentary. While cinema often bridges tradition and modern storytelling, the incident serves as a reminder that cultural symbols, particularly those rooted in living religious practices, demand thoughtful engagement. As the case proceeds, it is likely to remain a focal point in discussions about freedom of expression and the responsibilities that accompany fame.