KRK moves HC to quash FIR over defamatory, communal remarks on Akshay Kumar-starrer Laxmii

Mumbai: Bollywood actor and producer Kamaal R Khan (KRK) has filed a petition in the Bombay High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him on October 19, 2020. The case stems from his alleged defamatory and communal remarks targeting Bollywood personalities, including comments deemed offensive towards certain castes and religions.

The FIR was lodged at Malad police station following a complaint by a politician Rahul Narain Kanal, who accused KRK of attempting to incite communal discord between Hindus and Muslims. Kanal alleged that KRK’s comments, made on October 17 and 18, 2020, revolved around the depiction of interfaith relationships in the Akshay Kumar-starrer Laxmii. In the movie, Akshay Kumar played a dual role: Asif, a rational man who doesn’t believe in ghosts and Laxmii, the ghost of a transgender person who possesses Asif.

Kanal asserted that KRK’s remarks were intended to provoke public sentiments and potentially trigger communal unrest.

Among the controversial statements flagged by Kanal were tweets in which KRK accused Akshay Kumar of promoting ‘love jihad’ and allegedly insulting Goddess Laxmi through the film. One of KRK’s tweets reportedly read, “Akshay is a Canadian. If you still want to watch the movie, shame on you.” Additionally, he allegedly made derogatory remarks against producer Sabina Khan and filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma on his X account (formerly Twitter) and YouTube channel, which Kanal claimed could stoke animosity between religious groups.

In his petition, filed through advocate Sana Raees Khan, KRK asserted his innocence, arguing that he had been falsely implicated. His legal team challenged the complainant’s locus standi, contending that Kanal was neither personally affected nor a representative of any community purportedly targeted. The petition further highlighted the absence of certified electronic evidence to substantiate the allegations, as well as the lack of any recorded incidents of public unrest resulting from KRK’s statements.

“Commentary on a film or its characters is an exercise of free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and does not amount to promoting enmity. Mere use of colloquial language, such as ‘ghatiya trailer’, or sarcastic remarks cannot be classified as obscene,” the petition stated.

KRK also questioned the two-year delay in receiving a copy of the FIR, suggesting that the case was intended to harass him rather than address a genuine grievance. He urged the court to quash the FIR along with all related proceedings and sought a stay on any legal action against him until the matter is resolved.