- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Tandav Web-Series Row: Amazon Prime...
Tandav Web-Series Row: Amazon Prime Video Head Aparna Purohit Allowed To Travel Abroad By UP Court
Sparsh Upadhyay
6 Feb 2022 4:24 PM IST
The Lucknow Court last week allowed Amazon Prime Video's India head Aparna Purohit, who is facing an FIR registered in Lucknow, for allegedly depicting Hindu gods in a bad light in the web series Tandav, to travel abroad.Purohit had moved the Lucknow Court with her application seeking permission to travel abroad (Dubai) to meet her parents who are presently unwell. This application had been...
The Lucknow Court last week allowed Amazon Prime Video's India head Aparna Purohit, who is facing an FIR registered in Lucknow, for allegedly depicting Hindu gods in a bad light in the web series Tandav, to travel abroad.
Purohit had moved the Lucknow Court with her application seeking permission to travel abroad (Dubai) to meet her parents who are presently unwell. This application had been moved in view of Allahabad High Court's last year's order wherein she was asked to not leave the country without the permission of the Court.
Essentially, the order of the Allahabad HC reads thus:
"The accused-applicant is directed to fully cooperate in the ongoing investigation. The accused-applicant will not leave the country without prior permission of the competent Court."
Hearing her plea, the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs), Lucknow, Sunil Kumar allowed her to travel Dubai with a condition that she shall abide by all the conditions put up by the Allahabad High Court and shall give an undertaking before the Court that she shall co-operate in the investigation of the case and that she won't misuse the liberty granted by the Court.
Purohit has been booked for alleged commission of offences under Sections 66 (Computer related offences), 66F (Punishment for cyber terrorism) and 67 (Transmitting obscene material) IT Act, 2008 (as amended) apart from Sections 153-A (Promoting enmity between different groups), 295 (Defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion), 505(1)(b) (Public mischief), 505(2) (Statements promoting hatred between classes), 469 (Forgery for purpose of harming reputation) of IPC.
Advocates Purnendu Chakravarty, Shivanshu Goswami, and Anuj Tandon appeared for the petitioner.