The Allahabad High Court has summoned the director, producer, and dialogue writer of the film Adipurush, criticizing the "shameful and vulgar" depiction of certain characters. The court has ordered director Om Raut, producer Bhushan Kumar, and dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir to appear in person before the court on July 27. They are required to submit personal affidavits explaining their bonafides.

The court, in response to public interest litigation (PIL) petitions calling for a ban on the film, expressed disappointment in the filmmakers' lack of sensitivity toward the holiness and sanctity of the characters. It highlighted substandard dialogues and cheap language used in the film. The order stated that several scenes depicting Devi Sita were disgraceful to her character, and some scenes depicting the wife of Vibhishana were prima facie obscene and uncalled for. The portrayal of Ravana and his kingdom, Lanka, was also criticized as ridiculous and cheap.

The court emphasized that freedom of speech and expression cannot be used as a cover to engage in actions that violate decency, morality, and public order. It expressed concern that if such acts are not addressed promptly, more films touching sensitive aspects of religions other than Hinduism may be produced in the future.

The court also noted the failure of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to take timely action following the film's release, despite significant public unrest. It stated that the grievances of the offended public should not be ignored, as they have been maintaining public order and following the law.

In response to the petitioners' complaint that this film was not an isolated case, the court recognized the need for stringent measures to prevent similar incidents in the future. It called for "stringent and deterrent action" by the competent authority of the Central Government in the interest of the country's public at large.

To address the issue, the court ordered the constitution of an expert committee within a week. The committee, comprising at least five members, will examine whether the depiction of the film's story of Lord Rama, Devi Sita, Lord Hanuman, and Ravana conforms to the Valmiki Ramayana and other religious epics. The committee is required to submit its report before the court by July 27.

The Chairman of the CBFC has also been instructed to file a report by the same date, providing details on whether the applicable guidelines for film exhibition were followed in allowing the release of Adipurush.

The court's decision came in response to a plea filed by social activists Kuldeep Tiwari and Bandana Kumar, who argued that Adipurush had raised doubts about the integrity of the revered epic Ramayana and had defamed the cultural heritage of Ayodhya and the Hindu religion.

The Central government and the CBFC were represented by Senior Advocate and Deputy Solicitor General of India SB Pandey, assisted by Advocate Ashwani Kumar Singh. The State of Uttar Pradesh was represented by Additional Advocate General Vinod Kumar Shahi, assisted by Chief Standing Counsel Shailendra Kumar Singh and Additional Chief Standing Counsel Vivek Kumar Shukla.

Case Title: Kuldeep Tiwari and Another v. Union of India and Others