The High Court gave Singh protection from arrest until March 2, 2026. This lets the investigation go on, but makes sure he isn’t held while being questioned. However, this protection is only on the basis that Singh helps the police fully. The court also told the police not to do anything to force him to appear in court for the time being.
The judge made it clear that this protection was only for a short time, and Singh had to follow the law in the meantime. The people in authority have to make their objections and give their side of what happened before the next time in court. The court said it would look at whether Singh meant to cause offence, or did it without thinking.
The Charges, The Complaint, and The Law
A normal person made a complaint in Bengaluru, which led to a First Information Report – a police record – being made against Singh because of what he said at the IFFI film festival. Police made the case under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, because it was thought he had damaged religious feelings. The complaint says the copying of the scene made fun of the Daiva or Bhoota Kola tradition, which is very important in the culture of the coastal Karnataka area.
The FIR followed a claim that the act called a god a ghost and copied holy words. The person who complained said the copying of the scene broke the holiness of an important religious custom. Those who the state represents must now give detailed objections and proof to the court.
What The Court Said About The Duty Of People In The Public Eye
Justice M Nagaprasanna told people in the public eye not to make careless comments about gods and cultural traditions. He warned that no one is above the law, and saying sorry cannot take back words once they’ve been spoken. The court stressed that actors shape what the public thinks, and must be careful on stage and in public.
The judge asked whether Singh had enough knowledge of the culture before making the comments. The court said that being influential means having responsibility, and that thoughtless words can have a long-lasting effect. The court added that, even if people forget, digital records often make sure words stay around.
What Ranveer Singh Said and His Apology
Singh gave a public apology, saying he had wanted to praise Rishab Shetty’s acting. He said he respected all cultures and sincerely apologised for any hurt caused. Singh’s lawyers said the act was a quick, unplanned praise of another actor, not a deliberate attack on religious beliefs.
A leading lawyer for Singh stressed the apology and that there was no wish to do harm, while arguing. The defence asked the court to think about the situation, and that the comment was between two actors. The court noted the apology, but said that hurting people with words cannot be taken lightly.
What Happens Next, and The Wider Cultural Situation
The court put the case down for a further hearing on March 2, 2026 to look at objections. The court invited those who the state represents to make their objections before the next date in court. The court will then decide whether to drop the FIR or let a full trial go ahead.
The argument shows the problems between giving a tribute in art, and protecting religious traditions in India. Some people who criticised the copying of the scene said it offended the holy Daiva customs, while those who supported it said it was a praise of the acting. The situation shows how quickly statements by famous people can spread on social media and get legal attention.
The result may depend on proof of what Singh meant, and the small difference between expression and what communities feel. Legal experts say courts often consider the situation, apologies, and what harm can be shown in such cases. The case will test the legal limits of insult, and the duties of important people in culture.
Singh now faces continuing attention while helping police, and waiting for the court’s next order. What happens will have an effect on public discussion about art, religion, and being responsible for what you say.
