New court proceedings over the teaser
The Delhi High Court sought replies from government authorities and the producers of Sunny Deol’s forthcoming film Suryaa: Ant Se Aarambh Tak on November 2, after a group of doctors challenged its teaser. The court listed the petition for another hearing on November 16, according to independent reports by NDTV’s Nimitt Dixit and news agency PTI, carried by ThePrint.
Justice Amit Mahajan issued notices to the Central Board of Film Certification, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, MM Moviez and Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited. The proceeding concerns objections to the promotional video; the notice does not establish that the allegations against the film are correct.
[1][2]What the doctors are asking for
PTI identifies the petitioners as Dr Nishant Soni, Dr Ashish Tomar, Dr Ravi Bhatia and Dr Shivam Vatsal, including office-bearers of Doctors of Corporate Society. Their plea alleges that the teaser unfairly depicts doctors in private hospitals and could encourage hostility towards healthcare workers. Those are the petitioners’ allegations, not findings by the court.
NDTV reports that the petition seeks removal of the teaser from online platforms, examination by the relevant authorities and disclaimers clarifying that the film is fictional. It also seeks broader scrutiny of teasers and trailers before they are released online. The doctors object to the promotional material presenting its narrative as rooted in real events while making claims about the medical system.
[1][2]No stay on the teaser at this hearing
The distinction between the relief requested and the order made is important. According to PTI, the petitioners’ counsel, Varun Singh, asked the court to stay the teaser’s display, but the court did not pass an order on that request. NDTV likewise notes that issuing notice does not amount to a finding on the merits of the allegations.
Suryaa, directed by M. Padmakumar, is scheduled for a November 20 theatrical release. The next listed hearing falls four days before that date. The current development is the court seeking responses and setting a further hearing, rather than a judgment resolving the dispute or a judicial endorsement of the teaser’s claims.
[1][2]