Back
Actor's Mimicry Row Ends in Apology and Temple Pilgrimage: Karnataka HC Disposes Case Against Ranveer Singh
In a resolution blending remorse with reverence, the has closed criminal proceedings against Bollywood star Ranveer Singh over his mimicry of actor Rishab Shetty's performance from the film Kantara at the 56th International Film Festival of India (IFFI). Single-judge bench of Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna accepted Singh's unconditional apology and directed him to visit the Shri Chamundeshwari Temple in Mysuru within four weeks, effectively disposing of the petition filed under .
Stage Skit Turns into Legal Spotlight
The controversy erupted on , during the closing ceremony of the IFFI in Panjim, Goa. Invited to promote his upcoming film Dhurandar , Singh mimicked Rishab Shetty's iconic portrayal in Kantara , which some devotees interpreted as mocking the deity Chavundi Daiva . This sparked outrage among worshippers in Karnataka, leading Prashant Methal , a Bengaluru resident, to file a private complaint (PCR No. 21236/2025) on .
The registered FIR No. 17/2026 on , invoking Sections 196 (promoting enmity between groups), 299 (murder), and 302 (murder) of the —charges that escalated the mimicry jest into serious allegations of hurting religious sentiments. The I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), Bengaluru, referred the matter for investigation, prompting Singh to approach the High Court seeking to quash the FIR, complaint, and magistrate's order.
Duelling Narratives: Free Expression vs. Sacred Sentiments
Singh's legal team, led by Senior Advocate , argued the mimicry was innocuous appreciation, not malice, urging quashing under as no existed. They highlighted the artistic context at a national film event.
Opposing counsel— (Additional SPP for the State) and (for complainant Methal)—raised "several legal issues," objecting to the apology affidavit's lack of timeline but acknowledging its sincerity. The court sidestepped prolonged debate, focusing instead on reconciliation.
Court's Equitable Path: Apology Trumps Adjudication
Justice Nagaprasanna opted for a pragmatic middle ground, directing Singh to file an affidavit of apology and undertake a temple visit. Noting the " ," the court prioritized closure over protracted litigation, distinguishing this from routine quashing petitions.
No precedents were explicitly cited, but the ruling echoes principles of compromise in sentiment-based cases, balancing free speech with communal harmony under BNS provisions.
"In the light of the petitioner tendering apology and also that he would visit the temple and owing to the of the case, I deem it appropriate to record the affidavit and that have now been instituted for the aforesaid offences, with a rider that the petitioner shall visit the temple, within an outer limit of four weeks ."
— Justice M. Nagaprasanna, Para 5
Voices from the Verdict: Remorse in Words
Key excerpts capture the court's tone and Singh's contrition:
"At the outset, I apologize for unintentionally and inadvertently having offended sentiments of all communities who worship the deity Chavundi Daiva . I have the deepest respect and regard for the Hindu religion..."
— Ranveer Singh's Affidavit, Para 1" I have realized and understood the sensitivity surrounding the issue and am therefore expressing my deepest regret and conveying my sincere and unconditional apology ."
— Ranveer Singh's Affidavit, Para 2" It is needless to observe that any iteration by the actor of the kind... would undoubtedly be viewed seriously ."
— Justice M. Nagaprasanna, Para 6
Reports from sources like MSN corroborate the outcome, headlining it as the court "quashing" the FIR post-apology—a practical closure for Singh.
A Cautionary Close with Broader Echoes
The petition stands disposed on , shielding Singh from further probe while mandating his temple devotion. This nuanced directive—neither full acquittal nor rejection—sets a template for celebrity controversies touching faith: sincere remorse can expedite resolution.
For actors and artists, it's a reminder—mimicry's mirth may mimic malice in sensitive contexts. Future cases might cite this for mediated settlements in BNS sentiment offenses, promoting harmony over hostility in India's diverse cultural tapestry.
