The police, in its action taken report (ATR), said the shooting of the promo, showing the actors wearing shoes in a temple, was done in a studio and no such incident, as alleged in the complaint, ever took place.
"In view of the facts and report, no cognizable offence is made out. The promo was not shot to disturb the sanctity of a religious place or disturb or hurt the religious sentiments of any individual, group, community or section of the society.
The report was filed in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) V K Gautam who was on leave and link magistrate Jagminder Singh fixed the matter for March 2 for arguments.
The court had earlier directed the police to file an ATR explaining what action it has taken on the complaint filed by advocate Gaurav Gulati.
The complaint had sought the court's direction to the police to register an FIR against the two actors, Colors channel and director and producer of reality show 'Bigg Boss 9' for alleged offences under sections 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings), 298 (uttering words with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.
Jessu George, channel producer of 'VIACOM 18', in which it was stated that Shah Rukh Khan had appeared on the set of 'Big Boss 9' and met Salman Khan with whom he had worked in Bollywood movie 'Karan Arjun' a long time ago.
"As they (actors) had met after a long time, the director thought of an idea of showing them reuniting on the sets of 'Kali Mandir' in a similar manner as they had reunited in the movie 'Karan Arjun' in such a temple after their "re-birth" in the film.
The complaint filed against the actors had alleged that in a video being circulated, Shah Rukh and Salman were seen wearing shoes on the sets of a temple while shooting for an episode of Bigg Boss where the idol can be seen in the background.
"It is a disrespect to the Hindu religion and its belief as it is strictly prohibited to come in the temple with shoes and also they were showing their back to the idol which is also deemed to be an insult to the Hindu goddess... (sic)," it has alleged, claiming that it seemed to be a "well-planned malicious act to outrage Hindu feelings".
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
