After the Supreme Court lifted ban, the State government issued a statement saying that it would "study the SC order" and then decide on the next move.
A website quoted Karni Sena chief Lokendra Singh Kalvi as telling reporters in Ujjain, "I don't wish to call for a bandh protesting the movie's release on January 25 or on January 26 (Republic Day)".
The distribution process for a film usually begins a month before the release and advance booking of tickets starts four to five days prior to the release date. Bhansali was even attacked and thrashed by Karni Sena during one of its filming schedules. "I feel obliged as Rajasthan and Gujarat film distributors have assured us that the film will not be released". Ltd. and other producers of the movie challenging the bar on screening of the film in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh.
It is our duty to maintain law and order: Rajasthan Home Minister Gulab Chand Kataria said while referring to Rajput Karni Sena's threat that Prasoon Joshi won't be allowed to enter the state.
No Texas probes involving California torture suspects
Some of the children were chained to furniture inside a room filled with urine and feces, the law enforcement official added. And now, Child Protective Services is assessing their next possible steps. "And they had such good relationships".
Activists of the Rajput Youth Brigade today took out a protest march at Ambala Cantonment here against Sanjay Leela Bhansalis film Padmaavat, and mounted pressure on cinema hall owners not to screen the film.
To get its clearance from the censor board, the film underwent a lot of changes, including the title. "My plea wasn't to ban the movie or about the states banning it or any other issue pertaining to the film".
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea from an advocate for an urgent hearing of a fresh PIL seeking revocation of the certificate granted by the Central Board of Film Certification to the film Padmaavat on the grounds of "law and order". "We are exploring all options and studying the Supreme Court ruling".
Arguing on behalf of the film's director, Salve had contended that the film formed a part of the filmmaker's freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution.