‘Kingdom’ controversy: Madras High Court seeks response from police and Naam Tamilar party on theater protection plea

2 days ago 5
ARTICLE AD BOX

 Madras High Court seeks response from police and Naam Tamilar party on theater protection plea

Naam Tamilar Party coordinator Seeman had announced a protest to blockade movie theaters, alleging that the film 'Kingdom' starring Telugu actor Vijay Deverakonda misrepresents the people of Tamil Eelam. Following the announcement, several theatres across Tamil Nadu screening 'Kingdom' were attacked by Naam Tamilar party members. As a result, the Tamil Nadu distributor SSI Productions filed a case in the Madras High Court demanding protection for theaters where the film will be screened in Tamil Nadu.Here's a closer look.

Naam Tamilar Party’s lawyer calls the film anti-Tamil Eelam

When the case came up for hearing before Judge T. Bharat Chakravarthy, the police stated that the petitioner's request for protection had not yet been received, as per a report from The Hindu. Therefore, it requested time to provide an explanation in the case and requested that the hearing be adjourned to the next day. Lawyer Shankar, who appeared on behalf of the Naam Tamilar Party in the case, alleged that the film contained scenes condemning Tamil Eelam and that the lawsuit seeking protection was a publicity stunt.

He also requested time to explain, saying that their protest did not cause any untoward incident and did not hinder the fans.

Judge asserts films cleared by censor board cannot be blocked

Following these comments, the judge said that a film that has been approved by the censor board cannot be blocked and that everyone has the right to express their opinion in a democracy. He reportedly said that protests can be held, but they should be democratic and non-violent, and that if there is an objection to a film, one can choose legal means to cancel the certificate or campaign to boycott the film. Following that, the police and the Naam Tamilar Party were ordered to respond to the case, and the hearing was adjourned to the next day.

Read Entire Article