Actor Manoj Bajpayee has publicly responded to the ongoing controversy surrounding his upcoming Netflix film, *Ghooskhor Pandat*, following an FIR filed in Lucknow accusing the project of hurting religious and caste sentiments. Bajpayee reiterated that the film is fictional and not intended to offend any community, emphasizing his focus on portraying a character's personal journey.
The Genesis of the Controversy
The controversy escalated after an FIR was registered at Hazratganj Police Station, alleging that the film's title and promotional materials defamed the Brahmin community by linking the term 'Pandat' with corruption. This legal action has been accompanied by broader backlash, including:
• Petitions seeking a stay on the film's release in the Delhi High Court.
• Widespread social media boycott calls.
Manoj Bajpayee's Stance and Clarification
Sharing director Neeraj Pandey's earlier statement on social media, Manoj Bajpayee expressed his respect for public emotions and concerns. He stated:
• “I respect the emotions and concerns people have shared, and I take them seriously. When something you are part of causes hurt to some people, it makes you pause and listen.”
• Bajpayee clarified that his involvement in *Ghooskhor Pandat* is rooted in storytelling, focusing on a character's journey of self-realization rather than making any commentary on caste or community identity.
• He highlighted his professional trust in director Neeraj Pandey, noting the filmmaker's consistent seriousness and care in approaching his projects.
Filmmakers' Response and Legal Implications
In a significant move, Bajpayee also pointed to the filmmakers' decision to temporarily remove promotional material as a demonstration of their sensitivity to public sentiment. Director Neeraj Pandey had previously issued his own statement, clarifying that *Ghooskhor Pandat* is a fictional cop drama and the term 'Pandat' is used merely as a colloquial name for a character, not as a representation of any specific caste or community. He acknowledged the hurt caused and affirmed the decision to take down promotional content.
Legal petitions in the Delhi High Court argue that associating a term historically linked with scholarship and spiritual authority with corruption constitutes collective defamation, potentially harming the dignity and reputation of an identifiable community. This debate challenges the boundaries of creative expression within India's legal framework.
