PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J.
Keval Singh @ Kv Dhillon - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM M-2179-2024
Decided On : 05-04-2025
JUDGMENT :
N.S.Shekhawat, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 0003 dated 09.02.2020 under Sections 153, 153-A, 153-B, 160, 107 and 505 IPC (Annexure P-1) registered at Police Station SAS Nagar, District Mohali, Punjab and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the complaint moved by Bhupinder Singh, Inspector and the same has been reproduced below:-
"Today (09.02.2020) while Inspector was present in Office, it has been revealed from reliable source that one K.V. Dhillon produced a movie "Shooter" which is based on the life and crimes of notorious gangster "Sukha Kahlwan" and it promotes violence, heinous crime, extortion, threats and criminal intimidation. Notorious gangster "Sukha Kahlwan" used to describe himself as sharp shooter and was allegedly involved in more than 20 cases including murder, kidnapping and extortion. He was killed by another gangster in January, 2016. The producer has completed the movie "Shooter" and trailor is already released on 18/01/2020 which has widely viral on social media. The full movie "Shooter" is scheduled to be released on 21/02/2020. This movie is likely to instigate youngsters to take up arms and disturb public peace and harmony. It may be recalled that in a judgement rendered by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in civil writt petition 6213/2016 decided on 22.07.2019, it was directed that no songs or live shows will be played which glorify liquor, drug and spread violence. The act of K.V. Dhillon and the promoters, Directors, story writer and Actors of the movie "Shooter" disclose the commission of offences U/s 153, 153-A, 153-B,160,107,505 IPC. At 3:10 PM PS SSOC, Mohali Sd/- Bhupinder Singh, Inspector, SHO, SSOC, SAS Nagar dated 09.02.2020."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a professional film producer, who had produced a film titled as "Shooter", which is the center of controversy in the present case. The FIR was lodged with the broad allegations that the film portrays the life and criminal undertakings of an infamous gangster, namely, Sukha Kahlwan, and has been accused of promoting violence, heinous crimes, extortion, threats and criminal intimidation. Sukha Kahlwan identified himself as a sharp shooter and was allegedly engaged in over 20 criminal cases. In fact, the FIR also raised concerns about its potential to incite young individuals to participate in armed activities, which were likely to affect public peace and harmony adversely. There was also a reference to the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 6213 of 2016, whereby, a prohibition was imposed on live shows which glorify liqour, drugs and propagate violence. Learned counsel further contends that the movie "Shooter" was released on 21.02.2020, however, the FIR was registered on 09.02.2020 before its release. Thus, on 10.10.2020, the State of Punjab suspended the exhibition of movie for a period of 02 months citing the reason that the release of the movie would glorify violence and the younger generation could get influenced. In the meantime, the petitioner and others applied for certification before the Central Board of Film Certification (hereinafter to be referred as 'the CBFC') and certification No. DIL/3/1/2020-del dated 13.03.2020 was issued for the film, confirming its suitability for theatrical display and the petitioner was granted permission to display the movie. Learned counsel further refers to the certification dated 13.03.2020 (Annexure P-3) in this regard. However, despite grant of certification (Annexure P-3) by the CBFC, the petitioner could not release the movie in view of the order dated 10.02.2020 (Annexure P-2) issued by the State of Punjab. Further, in the purported compliance of the provisions of the Punjab Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952, another notification dated 12.07.2021 (Annexure P-4) was issued by the State Go
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the mere use of a name resembling that of a community leader does not automatically constitute an insult to a religious community, and deliber....
The court emphasized the need to protect freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and determined the FIR lacked basis for criminal charges under Sections 353(2) and 505(2).
Freedom of speech and expression, as well as the reasonable interpretation of speech in the context of political activism and public discourse.
FIR quashed - Through Facebook ID, posted objectionable material - Religious sentiments - Petitioner has shared post of other person, even, contents of FIR does not, prima facie, establish alleged of....
The importance of exhausting statutory remedies and the powers of the Central Government under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 to suspend the exhibition of any film.
The FIR lacks necessary ingredients for offences under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, justifying its quashing due to vagueness.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.