Ranveer Singh ‘Kantara’ Mimicry Row: Karnataka High Court Rebukes Ranveer Singh for ‘Insensitive Statement, Gross Ignorance’

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday strongly reprimanded Bollywood actor Ranveer Singh while hearing his petition seeking to quash an FIR filed against him over alleged mimicry of Kantara actor-director Rishab Shetty. The complaint claims that Singh’s remarks and imitation hurt religious sentiments linked to the film’s cultural and spiritual themes.

Court Questions Actor’s Conduct

During the hearing, the bench observed that public figures must exercise caution while making statements, especially when they relate to subjects deeply rooted in faith and tradition. The court reportedly termed the comments “insensitive” and reflective of “gross ignorance,” questioning why such remarks were made in the first place.

The FIR was lodged after Singh allegedly mimicked Shetty’s mannerisms and dialogues associated with Kantara, a film widely celebrated for its portrayal of Bhoota Kola traditions and coastal Karnataka’s cultural heritage. Complainants argued that the imitation trivialised sacred elements depicted in the movie.

Plea to Quash FIR

Ranveer Singh approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, contending that his remarks were taken out of context and were not intended to insult religious sentiments. His counsel argued that the actor’s mimicry was part of light-hearted commentary and did not amount to a criminal offence.

However, the court appeared unconvinced at this stage, noting that prima facie the allegations warranted examination. The bench emphasised that celebrities carry significant influence and must remain mindful of the potential impact of their words.

Cultural Sensitivity at Core

Kantara, released in 2022, became a pan-India blockbuster and earned acclaim for authentically representing local folklore and ritualistic practices. Given its spiritual undertones, the film holds emotional significance for many viewers, particularly in Karnataka.

The High Court indicated that matters involving religious beliefs cannot be brushed aside casually and that due process must take its course. The case will be heard further as the court examines whether grounds exist to quash the FIR.

The controversy has sparked debate on social media, with some defending freedom of expression while others stress the need for cultural and religious sensitivity in public discourse.