☰
×

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Against Sunny Deol's Film 'Suryaa: Ant Se Aarambh Tak'

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking to prevent the release of the film 'Suryaa: Ant Se Aarambh Tak', starring Sunny Deol. The court noted that the issue had already been raised in a separate petition by the medical community. The petitioners argued that the film portrays doctors negatively and encourages violence against them. The case is set for further hearing on November 16, while the CBFC is still reviewing the film for certification. This decision raises questions about the portrayal of healthcare professionals in media.
 

Court Decision on Film Release


New Delhi: On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) aimed at halting the release of the upcoming Hindi film Suryaa: Ant Se Aarambh Tak, which is set to hit theaters on November 20.


The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma, expressed that it would not consider the PIL since the matter has already been addressed by the medical community in a separate writ petition currently before a single judge.


On November 2, the single judge had issued a notice to relevant authorities, requesting their response to claims that the film depicts doctors in private hospitals as corrupt and incites violence against healthcare workers.


This case is scheduled for a hearing on November 16.


The division bench noted that even if the petitioners are medical professionals, there is no justification for multiple proceedings on the same issue.


The court encouraged the petitioners to join the ongoing proceedings before the single judge and allowed them to present their concerns to the authorities.


Dr. Nachiketa Bhatia and Dr. Dhruv Chauhan filed the PIL, arguing that the film's trailer glorifies violence against medical practitioners and unfairly generalizes corruption within the healthcare sector.


They contended that the film poses a threat to public order and requested that the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) review and potentially modify or remove objectionable content from the film.


When questioned by the bench about the rationale for considering their plea given the similar petition already in progress, the petitioners' attorney argued that the sensitivity of the issue warranted a broader scope in a PIL compared to a writ petition.


The CBFC's representative stated that no certification has yet been granted for the film, which is still under review. They also noted that this Hindi film is a remake of a South Indian movie that is already publicly available.


The petitioners' lawyer further argued that the teaser's language suggests that patients' relatives might feel justified in resorting to violence against doctors and medical staff.