Ancient Indian scriptures open to debate: HC dismisses plea to stop telecast of Vishnu Puran

New Delhi: Ancient Indian scriptures are open to debate, said the Allahabad High Court Wednesday as it dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) to stop the re-telecast of Vishnu Puran, a serial on various channels of Doordarshan.

Noting that a work of art based on such texts could be inaccurate, deliberately or otherwise, a bench of justices Sunita Agarwal and Saumitra Dayal Singh said discussions around religious scriptures will likely result in multiple views at various levels.

The court was hearing a PIL filed by Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, who objected to the representation of certain characters in the TV show. According to his contention, Lord Vishnu and other Hindu deities were “misrepresented” in the serial. Jaiswal wanted a restraining order on episodes between 47 and 62 in particular.

But the court denies his motion, saying, “That in part is the beauty of plurality that our society practices.”

Vishnu Puran is among the mythological shows the national broadcaster started airing during the lockdown that began on 25 March to combat the spread of coronavirus. An adaptation of the popular ancient scripture ‘Vishnu Purana’, the show dramatises the ancient collection of stories and scripture. A large part of the text talks of the 10 incarnations of Lord Vishnu.

PIL against Vishnu Puran

Jaiswal’s lawyer, senior advocate O.P. Singh argued that the show had hurt the sentiments of his client, a member of the Vaish community.

Singh specifically objected to the negative portrayal of the character Sahastra Arjun, purportedly the grandson of Lord Brahma, considered the creator in Hindu mythology’s trinity. He referred to the PIL that quoted Sanskrit verses from the original text to counter the depiction.

Speaking to ThePrint, Singh said, “In the serial he is shown as a negative character and the description attributed to him is that of a criminal.” Singh said his client is a devotee of Sahastra Arjun, also worshipped as a deity in Madhya Pradesh, and moved the court because the representation hurt his sentiments.

Without delving into much debate, the bench rejected Singh’s argument on the grounds that his contention against a “work of art” is unfounded.

“It is undisputed that the objectionable work is basically a work of art for entertainment. It may be based on certain scriptures or ancient works and therefore it may suffer from inaccuracy and mistake either deliberate or otherwise,” the court noted.

‘Don’t be over sensitive’

The court said it viewed the PIL as an exercise to attract controversy or to create one where none exists.

Also, it called the petitioner “over sensitive” and considered it improper for the court to act on his “line of thought.”

“… The petitioner who believes in a particular line of thought and finds himself opposed to another view or thought being represented in the TV serial of which he is neither a creator nor the participant, but a mere spectator, that too with an option to watch or not to watch such a show,” the high court said.

On the petitioner’s request to direct the Censor board to not give clearance to the episodes specifically mentioned, the bench said it found no “substance in the pleadings” that were not supported by any actionable evidence.

Singh said his client is likely to challenge the order before the Supreme Court.