Controversial actress Kangana Ranaut needs no introduction. She is known for speaking her heart out with any filter. The very same nature of the actress made her controversy’s favorite child. More than her film career and successful films, Kangana Ranaut stays in the middle of the news with her controversial statements and posts on social media.
On several occasions, Kangana Ranaut stood at the receiving end with her controversial posts. As a result, Kangana Ranaut’s Twitter account was permanently blocked by the social media giant after receiving several complaints.
Kangana Ranaut’s controversial social media posts once became a debatable issue when the issue reached the Supreme Court. Seeking directives to censor the posts made by the actress, a petition was filed in the Apex Court. During the hearing, the Supreme Court made key comments on the issue.
A noted lawyer who hails from the financial capital of India Mumbai, Charanjeet Singh Chanderpal had approached the Supreme Court against Kangana Ranaut’s social media posts. He requested the Apex Court to issue directives that Kangana Ranaut’s post will be censored.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Bela M. Trivedi heard the petition and said that the Court cannot issue such directives to censor the posts that are made by the controversial actress.
However, the Supreme Court said that it is a sensitive topic and it cannot issue the required directives. The Supreme Court said that issuing such directives creates an opportunity for Kangana Ranaut to post more such posts.
The bench hearing the petition gave a piece of advice to the lawyer to ignore the posts made by Kangana Ranaut. The bench also said the petitioner can proceed under the criminal law as it is a big remedy for synch posts.
In the petition, lawyer Chanderpal also sought directives to bring all the FIRs that were filed against her together and asked the court to take action against Kangana Ranaut as she made objectionable comments against the Sikh community in the past.
To this, the Supreme Court replied that the matter is lying between the actress and government and it is not appreciable for the third party to intervene in the matter.
