Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL to Stop Release of Film Jolly LLB 3
Lexpedia · 23 September 2025, 12:00 am
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to prevent the release and exhibition of the film Jolly LLB 3, which was scheduled for release on September 19.
Petition Dismissed with Rs 50,000 Cost for Wasting Judicial Time
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi rejected the petition filed by Syeda Neelufur, imposing a cost of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner for unjustifiable consumption of judicial time. The Court ordered the petitioner to deposit the cost with the court registry, warning that failure to comply would lead to the matter being listed again on October 4 for coercive action against her.
Petitioner Objects to Dialogues Depicted in Film’s Teaser
The petitioner’s counsel argued that certain dialogues in the film’s recently released teaser were derogatory and maligned the sanctity of the judicial system, including judges and advocates.
Court Defends Creative Freedom, Labels Film as Humorous
The bench responded by emphasizing that Jolly LLB 3 is a humorous movie intended to appeal to some viewers’ sense of humor, even if it may not appeal to everyone’s taste.
The Court observed “It is obvious that the depiction of the courtroom scene appears to be aiming to appeal to the sense of humour of the audience. The depiction does not appeal to the sense of humour of the petitioner or this Court. That is no ground to stifle creativity or issue an order for censoring the same.”
Court Condemns PILs that Waste Judicial Resources
The order further noted that such PILs are often filed for unjustified purposes, consuming valuable judicial time unnecessarily. The Court said “We find that such PILs unjustifiably consume judicial time and accordingly the petition is filed for some purpose.”
Additional Plea for Investigation and Apology Rejected
The petition had also sought directions to initiate legal action against the film’s actors and makers under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and the Information Technology Act 2000, claiming defamation and violation of the law. The plea demanded that the respondents publish an unconditional apology in prominent national newspapers.
The Court dismissed these claims along with the petition. The petitioner must deposit the Rs 50,000 cost by the next hearing date; otherwise, the Court will initiate coercive measures.
Case Title: Syeda Neelufur v. Union of India & Others
