A Mumbai court has asked the police to lodge an FIR against Bollywood actor Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel for allegedly trying to create communal tension with their provocative tweets.
Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel in Mumbai. (PTI)
A Mumbai court has asked the police to lodge an FIR against Bollywood actor Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel for allegedly trying to create communal tension with their provocative tweets.
The order was passed by the Bandra metropolitan magistrate Jaydeo Y Ghule passed the order on Friday, based on a complaint filed by casting director Sahil Ashrafali Sayyed.
Sahil had lodged the complaint seeking the court’s direction for registration of an FIR under IPC sections 153A (promoting enmity), 295A (malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings), 124A (sedition) against the actor and her sister, his lawyer Ravish Zamindar said.
The complainant has alleged that Kangana Ranaut has been defaming Bollywood over the past two months by calling it a “hub of nepotism”, “favouritism”, etc, through her tweets and television interviews.
In the complaint, he said that Kangana Ranaut has also tweeted “very objectionable” comments, which has not only hurt his religious sentiments, but also the feelings of many other artistes. Sahil Sayyed has further alleged that Kangana Ranaut has been trying to divide the artistes in Bollywood on communal lines.
“Her sister, too, has made objectionable comments on social media to spread communal tension between two religious groups,” the complainant has said.
Upon perusal of the documents on record and the lawyer’s submission, the court found that “cognisable offence” has been committed by accused Kangana Ranaut.
The court then directed the police to initiate necessary action and investigation against the actor and her sister under relevant provisions of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
“Total allegations are based upon the comments made on electronic media- Twitter and interviews- and a thorough investigation by an expert is necessary,” the court said.