A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Delhi High Court against Honey Singh’s song ‘Manic’, alleging that the lyrics promoted violence and misogyny.
The PIL, filed by a social activist, sought a ban on the song, claiming that it was “highly objectionable and indecent”. The petitioner argued that the song’s lyrics were not only offensive but also promoted a culture of violence and disrespect towards women.
Honey Singh’s Counsel Argues for Creative Freedom
Honey Singh’s counsel, appearing before the Delhi High Court, argued that the song was a work of art and that the lyrics were meant to be a reflection of the harsh realities of life. The counsel contended that the song did not promote violence or misogyny but rather was a commentary on the societal issues that plague our world.
The counsel also argued that creative freedom was essential for artists and that the court should not impose its own moral standards on works of art. The counsel cited various judgments of the Supreme Court, which have consistently held that artistic freedom is an essential part of the freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL, Upholds Creative Freedom
After hearing the arguments, the Delhi High Court dismissed the PIL, holding that the song ‘Manic’ did not promote violence or misogyny. The court observed that the lyrics of the song were not obscene or indecent and did not violate any provision of law.
The court also held that creative freedom is not unfettered and that artists must ensure that their work does not violate the rights of others or promote violence or hatred. However, the court observed that in this case, the song ‘Manic’ did not cross the line and was therefore protected under the freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
Honey Singh’s Reaction
Reacting to the court’s decision, Honey Singh said, “I am thrilled that the court has upheld my right to creative freedom. As an artist, I believe that it is essential to push boundaries and challenge societal norms. I am grateful that the court has recognized the value of artistic freedom and has not imposed its own moral standards on my work.”
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s decision to dismiss the PIL against Honey Singh’s song ‘Manic’ is a significant victory for artistic freedom. The court’s observation that creative freedom is not unfettered but must be balanced against the rights of others is a nuanced and thoughtful approach to the issue.
As the court has observed, artistic freedom is essential for the growth and development of art and culture. However, this freedom must be exercised responsibly and with sensitivity towards the rights and feelings of others.
