‘Jolly LLB 3’ Actors Akshay Kumar, Arshad Warsi Summoned by Pune Court

Bollywood’s popular courtroom comedy franchise, “Jolly LLB,” has once again found itself in a legal wrangle, with a Pune civil court issuing summons to actors Akshay Kumar, Arshad Warsi, and director Subhash Kapoor. The legal action stems from a petition filed by a local lawyer who claims the upcoming film, “Jolly LLB 3,” disrespects the judiciary and portrays the legal profession in a derogatory manner.

The summons, dated August 18, directs the trio to appear in court on October 28 to respond to the allegations. The complaint was filed by advocate Wajed Rahim Khan, who, along with another advocate, Ganesh Mhaske, expressed strong objections to certain elements in the film’s recently released teaser. The petition specifically targets a scene in which judges are allegedly referred to by the slang term “mama,” which the petitioners argue is a grave insult to the dignity of the bench.

Advocate Khan stated that while the film is intended as a comedy, it goes too far in mocking the legal system. He emphasized the need for respect for lawyers and judges and argued that the film’s portrayal undermines the integrity of the judiciary. This is not the first time the “Jolly LLB” franchise has faced legal scrutiny. The previous installments also encountered similar issues, with court proceedings playing a significant role in their production and release.

This current legal challenge has resurfaced just as the film is nearing its theatrical release, scheduled for September 19. The third installment in the series is particularly anticipated as it brings together both Akshay Kumar and Arshad Warsi, who played the lead roles in “Jolly LLB 2” and the original “Jolly LLB,” respectively. The film also features veteran actor Saurabh Shukla, who reprises his role as the memorable Judge Sundar Lal Tripathi.

The court’s summons requires the filmmakers and lead actors to appear in person to present their defense and provide all relevant documents. Failure to appear could result in the case being heard and determined in their absence. This development casts a shadow of uncertainty over the film’s smooth release and once again highlights the ongoing debate between creative freedom and the sensitivities of professional communities.