Akhya Pandey
On 21st August 2025, Pune Court issued Summons to Bollywood actors Akshay Kumar, Arshad Warsi, and director Subhash Kapoor with reference to their upcoming film ‘Jolly LLB 3’, after a petition was filed by advocate Wajed Rahim Khan.
The petition stated that the film used slangs such as “mama” for judges and portrayed lawyers and judges in a manner which reduced the dignity of the legal profession. Focusing on the petition, the Court directed the concerned actors and directors to be present on 28th October 2025 at 11 a.m. before Civil Jurisdiction.
The Summons follows the earlier proceedings in Ajmer, where the District Bar Association, through its President Chandrabhan Singh Rathod, contacted the Civil Judge, Ajmer North, who was trying to stop the shooting of the film. The complaint highlighted objectionable illustrations like a judge chewing tobacco, a lawyer being physically attacking, and immoral practices rephrase. The association argued that such scenes made fun of judicial institutions and ridiculed the practice of law, which reduced public confidence in the system. The Ajmer Court took cognizance of the petition, given that the prima facie could rephrase
The case in Pune is seen through the lens of Contempt Jurisprudence, as Section 2 (c) Act, 1971 of Contempt has defined Criminal Contempt to include any publication or Act that scams or bends to reduce court rights. Although the Pune petition does not clearly invite punishment, the base clearly relaxes on established principles that judicial institutions should not be painted in such a way that rephrase their rights or invites public ridiculing. The Indian Courts have previously reiterated that the freedom of expression should be protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution and it cannot even expand the material that eradicates public confidence in the judiciary.
It is important to note that the ‘Jolly LLB’ franchise has a history of judicial inquiry. In 2017, ‘Jolly LLB 2’ faced challenges when advocates objected to the use of “LLB” in the title, arguing that it rephrases the degree of law. The Bombay High Court then formed a three-member committee to review the film, and the matter was also brought before the Supreme Court, which depicts seriousness, with which the courts have protected the image of the legal system in the popular media. The current proceedings before the Pune Court will determine whether ‘Jolly LLB 3’ has crossed the permissible limit between satire and contempt. The upcoming hearing in October is expected to weigh the right to creative freedom against the need to protect the dignity of the Courts, and the possibility of its result will shape how far the cinematic representations of the judiciary can go in future.
Instagram: Click Here.
LinkedIn: Click Here.
For Collaboration and Business: Click Here.