Srinagar court dismisses obscenity complaint against Gulmarg fashion show
A court in Srinagar has dismissed a complaint alleging 'obscenity and public consumption of alcohol' against designers Shivan & Narresh, the organisers of a controversial fashion show held in Gulmarg on March 7.
The court observed that two models wearing 'skimpy clothes or swimwear in the broader scheme of the event does not attract the penal offence of obscenity'.
The complaint was filed by one Adil Nazir Khan on March 10, seeking action under sections 296 and 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and section 50 A of the Jammu and Kashmir Excise Act, 1958. The complainant had named the organisers and editor-in-chief of Elle India, alleging 'obscenity, hurting religious sentiments during the month of Ramzan and public consumption of alcohol'.
The court of special mobile railway magistrate Faizan i Nazar said the complainant's allegations were supported by two screenshots.
'Two screenshots annexed with the complaint show a female and a male model in skimpy clothes. That is the sole fact appearing in the complaint alleged to be obscene. Accused on the other hand has placed on record material which show that in the fashion show, several models participated and the above two models wearing skimpy clothes actually were showcasing swimwear, for which the company of first accused has expertise,' the judgment pronounced on Wednesday said.
Quoting a Supreme Court judgement, the court said that in determining contemporary community standards, regard is to be given to 'contemporary mores and national standards and not the standard of a group of susceptible or sensitive persons'.
There was widespread outrage across Kashmir after photos of the event showcasing ski wear collection surfaced on social media platforms, with people saying it was 'disrespecting local sensitivities'. Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah had ordered a probe into the show.
The designer duo who organised the show, Shivan Bhatiya and Narresh Kukreja, had subsequently apologised for 'any hurt caused'.
Shivan and Narresh is a prominent luxury resort wear brand. On its account of microblogging platform X, the label calls itself 'India's first luxury holiday brand'.
Regarding allegations under section 299 of the BNS, which proscribes deliberate malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs, the court said no court shall take cognisance except with the sanction of the Centre or of the state government.
Part of the Ski & Après Ski 2025 festival, Shivan & Narresh had hosted the event to mark its 15th anniversary, showcasing skiwear collection with vibrant art prints.
The court also dismissed the offence stated under section 50 A of the Jammu and Kashmir Excise Act, 1958, which proscribes drinking in public or any place of worship.
'It is only the deputy commissioner, police and other authorities stated under the Act who have the locus standi to maintain a complaint under the Excise Act. Four-hour permit for serving liquor in connection with get together on March 7, 2025, in favour of Nedous Hotel, Gulmarg, issued by deputy excise commissioner (executive), Kashmir division, on March 1, 2025, has been placed on record,' the court said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 hours ago
- Indian Express
Abhyanthara Kuttavali movie review: Asif Ali film claims to spotlight ‘issues faced by men'; but is that its true intent?
Abhyanthara Kuttavali movie review: At a crucial moment in debutant director Sethunath Padmakumar's Abhyanthara Kuttavali, Sahadevan (Asif Ali) breaks the fourth wall and tells the audience directly, 'Don't bother reacting; after all, it's a man who died.' He also, during a court hearing, comments on the rising number of suicide cases among men in the country, particularly owing to 'marriage-related problems'. While the well-being of every person, regardless of caste, gender, race or creed, is equally important, and many experts have pointed out that patriarchy harms everyone, including men, Abhyanthara Kuttavali positions itself as an attempt to spotlight issues faced by men. Particularly focusing on how 'fake cases' are slapped on them without humane consideration. However, in all honesty, the film ends up being a brazen attempt to overlook and invisibilise the harassment and crimes women have faced for centuries, mostly at the hands of men, by reducing it all to three cases (including two subplots) told through a masculinist lens, by completely villainising the female characters. Although his marriage to Nayana (Thulasi) was a joyous occasion for Sahadevan, his happiness was short-lived. He soon ends up at the Anthikad police station after she files a complaint accusing him of demanding more dowry and physically abusing her. As a result, the police register a case against him under Section 498A of the IPC (now Sections 85 and 86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita). As Sahadevan narrates to the police the 'truths' behind the incidents mentioned in the complaint, Abhyanthara Kuttavali cuts to flashbacks, in which we are shown that Nayana, though seemingly happy, has been keeping a distance from Sahadevan since day one. They barely even communicate, let alone have physical intimacy. Nayana soon tells Sahadevan that she wishes to pursue higher studies in the Netherlands, which would help settle there too, and suggests selling the gold ornaments her parents gifted her to fund it. When he objects, she is shown injuring herself. Her parents soon arrive and take her back home, following which she files the complaint. Once the case reaches the court, Sahadevan meets two other men — Peter (Sidharth Bharathan) and Makkar (Harisree Ashokan) — who are also dealing with unfair cases filed against them by their wife and daughter-in-law, respectively, as the system 'only favours the women'. The remainder of the film follows Sahadevan's efforts to prove his innocence. Although Abhyanthara Kuttavali mentions at the start that it is a 'work of fiction', the movie leaves no opportunity to generalise things and give good conduct certificates to men. This is achieved by cleverly portraying the male characters as noble and good-natured, albeit with some flaws like occasional drinking, while most of the women are depicted as apathetic, manipulative and often 'gold diggers'. From Sahadevan, his father Menon (Balachandran Chullikkad), and his friends Yudas (Anand Manmadhan) and Deshavasi (Azees Nedumangad) to Peter and Makkar, all the men are portrayed with sympathy, their moral grey areas conveniently omitted. Even Viswanathan (Jagadeesh), Nayana's lawyer, is ultimately shown in a positive light. In contrast, nearly all the female characters, except for elderly women who conform to the patriarchal norms of the 'ideal mother', are presented as greedy and lacking compassion. To reinforce this, the film even includes a scene where a woman is shown asking Yudas about his financial assets in detail during a pennukaanal (matchmaking visit), prompting him to give a lecture on how women should fend for themselves. In another instance, one of the few self-reliant women in the film, Anila (Shreya Rukmini), an assistant to Sahadevan's advocate, is shown sitting silently in court during the only time she appears on her senior's behalf without speaking up for her client. Although the scene suggests that she is too inexperienced and intimidated to argue in front of Viswanathan, prompting Sahadevan to represent himself, it inadvertently implies that even women who do have a voice choose not to speak up when men are the victims, leaving the latter to fight for themselves. The film is, in fact, packed with similar stereotypical and misogynistic narrative devices that reduce the complex topic of 'issues faced by men' to 'women are misusing the laws (and the freedom they have been 'given')'. It fails to even acknowledge the structural and systemic challenges men face within a patriarchal and elitist society, where only the rich and affluent wield real power. Towards the end, seemingly in an attempt to suggest that the film isn't anti-women, Abhyanthara Kuttavali shows Nayana and one of her friends briefly addressing their life struggles. 'Interestingly', this is one of the few occasions wherein the movie gives the women the chance to narrate their stories. Almost all other times, we are only shown the men's versions. While Nayana's friend shares how she lost a hand due to violence inflicted by her father, Nayana herself recounts how harassment by a teacher made her detest men and marriage altogether, prompting the two to decide to move abroad together and live in freedom. Nayana mentions this as the reason why she agreed to marry Sahadevan, as it would give her complete ownership of the gold gifted by her parents, which would help them fund their dream. However, their stories appear only as passing references, quickly dropped after five minutes. Just a (rhetorical) question to the makers: what about the heinous crimes faced by these women? It is certain that these were only the tip of the iceberg of the torments they faced in life, including many forms of daily sexual harassment. Were their sufferings not as important as Sahadevan's to get more screentime and a bit of empathy? While the film addresses the issue of false cases being filed against men, which in no way should be encouraged, it conveniently overlooks the many, many, many instances of women facing physical and emotional abuse within their own homes, the vast majority of which go unreported. A low conviction rate in such cases does not automatically imply that all cases are fabricated. It's high time we acknowledged that reality. By presenting a one-sided narrative, writer-director Sethunath Padmakumar ensures that Abhyanthara Kuttavali caters to a male audience, particularly those who blindly believe that men's victimhood exists solely because there are legal protections for the oppressed. The film offers these viewers enough 'goosebumps-inducing' moments, especially through quite a few dialogues that denounce alimony. Had men opened their mouths and moved their fingers as diligently and ferociously as they did following the Bengaluru techie suicide of December 2024, the world might have been a better place for all by now. Although Asif Ali delivers a neat performance as Sahadevan, it can't be called impactful, largely because the film relies heavily on dialogues to convey his emotions rather than allowing his acting to speak for itself. Nonetheless, there are moments in Abhyanthara Kuttavali where Asif's strength as a performer in communicating intense emotions through restrained acting shines. Despite limited screen time, Harisree Ashokan makes a strong impression as Makkar. Azees Nedumangad and Anand Manmadhan provide some comic relief, though not all the jokes land consistently. Thulasi, as Nayana, is unfortunately underwhelming. There are several moments in the movie, especially those meant to depict her anger or sorrow, where her portrayal comes across as caricatured. Rahul Raj's background score, however, does manage to elevate Abhyanthara Kuttavali to some extent and prevents it from slipping entirely into preachy territory. Abhyanthara Kuttavali movie cast: Asif Ali, Jagadeesh, Harisree Ashokan, Sidharth Bharathan, Thulasi, Shreya Rukmini Abhyanthara Kuttavali movie director: Sethunath Padmakumar Abhyanthara Kuttavali movie rating: 1.5 stars Anandu Suresh is a Senior sub-editor at Indian Express Online. He specialises in Malayalam cinema, but doesn't limit himself to it and explores various aspects of the art form. He also pens a column titled Cinema Anatomy, where he delves extensively into the diverse layers and dimensions of cinema, aiming to uncover deeper meanings and foster continuous discourse. Anandu previously worked with The New Indian Express' news desk in Hyderabad, Telangana. You can follow him on Twitter @anandu_suresh_ and write (or send movie recommendations) to him at ... Read More
News18
17 hours ago
- News18
‘Popularity No Shield From Law': Allahabad HC Refuses To Quash Case Against Elvish Yadav
Last Updated: Elvish Yadav had sought to quash criminal proceedings against him in a case involving the use of snakes during a music video shoot, and alleged drug and wildlife offences. The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition by social media influencer Elvish Yadav seeking to quash criminal proceedings against him in a high-profile case involving the use of snakes during a music video shoot, and alleged drug and wildlife offences. Yadav had moved the court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), challenging the charge-sheet filed on April 5, 2024, the subsequent summoning order dated April 8, 2024, and the entire criminal proceedings in Case Crime No. 461 of 2023. The case, which began with an FIR registered at Sector-49 Police Station in Noida, accuses Yadav and others of violating provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, IPC, and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. Yadav's counsel, senior advocate Naveen Sinha, argued that the FIR itself was flawed, having been lodged by an Animal Welfare Officer — a person not authorized under Section 55 of the Wildlife Protection Act to initiate prosecution. He also alleged that the proceedings were motivated by media sensationalism stemming from the applicant's celebrity status, and that the snakes featured in the controversial video were non-poisonous pets used during the shoot without any harm caused. Further, it was contended that there was no substantive evidence linking Yadav to any offence under the NDPS Act or the Indian Penal Code, and that sections 27 and 27A of the NDPS Act were hastily invoked by police in a bid to sensationalise the arrest. However, the Additional Advocate General for the State and counsel for the complainant argued that a detailed investigation had been carried out, and a prima facie case had emerged against Yadav warranting a trial. They emphasised that the points raised by the applicant are matters of defense and ought to be considered during trial rather than at the pre-trial stage. After hearing all parties, the bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava observed that the trial court had rightly taken cognizance after the investigating officer filed a charge-sheet based on new evidence that went beyond the original FIR. The judge remarked that 'popularity or position of the accused cannot be basis of extension of protection" and reiterated that every individual stands equal before the law. 'The popularity or position of the accused cannot be basis of extension of protection and as per law of this land each and every person irrespective of his popularity or personality are equal in the eye of law," court observed. Holding that the issues raised by Yadav's counsel could be appropriately examined during the course of trial, the high court dismissed the application stating that it lacked merit. First Published: June 06, 2025, 14:17 IST
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Chargesheet filed against Boby Chemmanur for obscene remarks on actor
Kochi: Kochi city police filed a chargesheet against Thrissur-based businessman Boby Chemmanur for allegedly making sexually coloured and derogatory remarks against a prominent actor on social media. The chargesheet was submitted to the Ernakulam magistrate court on Wednesday, following an extensive investigation. According to the chargesheet, Chemmanur made the remarks with the intent to humiliate the actor. Police said they collected evidence of him making offensive comments against several individuals online. The chargesheet includes video clips from interviews and the confidential statement provided by the actor. Chemmanur is expected to be produced before the court in the coming days. Meanwhile, police are investigating a separate complaint filed by the actor against 30 other individuals who allegedly posted sexually explicit and abusive comments on her social media posts. The case against Chemmanur was initially registered at the Ernakulam central police station on Jan 7 after the actor submitted a formal complaint. She alleged that Chemmanur made obscene remarks against her on social media platforms and humiliated her in public during the inauguration of a jewellery showroom. Acting swiftly, the police arrested the 62-year-old businessman from a resort in Wayanad within 24 hours of the complaint. He was charged under non-bailable offences, including Section 75(4) of the BNS, which pertains to making sexually coloured remarks as a form of sexual harassment and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, which prohibits publishing or transmitting obscene material electronically. Chemmanur, known for being the director of Chemmanur International Jewellers and founder of Life Vision Charitable Trust, rose to fame in 2012 after signing football legend Diego Maradona as brand ambassador and bringing him to Kannur.
