We are going to ask many questions because this is not only about entertainment, but about the social fabric too.
The bench which also comprised Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud termed as "misconceived", the prayers sought by Sharma in his fresh petition and said that the court can not pre-judge a movie which is yet to be certified by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
According to CBFC insiders, the board is yet to scrutinise the application.
The filmmakers have submitted three applications, including the latest 3D one, to the Censor Board. Now, it's not announced the official release date of the movie. While speaking to media, he said it would be wrong to comment on the film before it releases.More news: Joe Moorhead hired as Mississippi State's coach
"There is no intention to do so, as of now", he said, informing the court that it would harm the movie's business interest if it is screened overseas before release in India. The court further added that if the court can't prejudge the movie than why are people doing it.
Historians are also divided on whether Padmini actually existed. The matter of the clearance is still pending before the Central Board of Certification.
The judges reiterated that it is the prerogative of the national censor board to review the film and make a decision on whether it is suitable for screening.
Although the court did not name any politician or party, the rap came days after the BJP chief ministers of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan had declared their intention of banning the movie in their states for allegedly hurting Rajput sentiments.
The 30-member panel comprises several actor-turned-MPs, including Hema Malini, Raj Babbar and Paresh Rawal, who are hearing out all parties to take a decision not just on Padmavati but also on other films with a historical context.