The Telangana High Court granted interim bail to Telugu star Allu Arjun on Friday, following his arrest related to a tragic stampede at the premiere of ‘Pushpa 2’ at Sandhya Theatre in Hyderabad. The court referenced a similar incident during the promotion of Shah Rukh Khan’s 2017 film ‘Raees’, which resulted in the loss of a life.
Key Developments at the Bail Hearing
- Comparison with SRK’s Case:
- Allu Arjun’s legal team cited the Vadodara railway station stampede during ‘Raees’ promotions as a precedent, arguing there was no reckless or negligent behavior by the actor.
- In SRK’s case, the Gujarat High Court had quashed criminal charges, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court. The defense maintained that Arjun, who was on the first floor of the theatre, could not be held directly responsible for events on the ground floor.
- Arguments in Defense:
- Allu Arjun’s counsel stressed the absence of negligence, noting that fans gathered spontaneously. They dismissed police claims that authorities were uninformed about the actor’s plans.
- The High Court emphasized the principle that a celebrity’s fame does not diminish their right to liberty.
- Court’s Ruling:
- The court granted Allu Arjun interim bail, overruling the lower court’s decision to send him to 14 days of judicial custody.
Tragic Incident at the ‘Pushpa 2’ Premiere
- A stampede during the premiere on December 4 resulted in the death of a 35-year-old woman, Revathi, and injured her son.
- Three individuals, alongside Allu Arjun, were arrested following police investigations into the incident.
The ‘Raees’ Incident as a Precedent
- During the ‘Raees’ promotion in Gujarat, Shah Rukh Khan’s act of throwing promotional merchandise into a crowd led to a stampede at Vadodara railway station.
- While the actor was not found criminally liable, the case was widely debated before being dismissed in 2022 by the Gujarat High Court and upheld later by the Supreme Court.
Reflections and Questions
The High Court’s decision in Arjun’s favor acknowledges the complex dynamics of celebrity influence and public accountability.
- Key Question: Should public figures take on more responsibility for managing crowd safety during events, or do such incidents solely stem from administrative shortcomings?
Conclusion
This case underlines the intricate balance between legal accountability and safeguarding individual freedoms. As stampedes continue to occur at celebrity events, it serves as a call for improved crowd management and joint accountability between organizers and public figures.
Leave a Reply