It started as a simple, festive Raksha Bandhan advertisement featuring Bollywood star Kriti Sanon. It ended just days later with a major jewelry brand pulling the campaign offline and issuing a public apology to the internet.
The controversy did not stem from what was said in the ad, but rather what the actress was wearing. For the campaign, Kriti Sanon wore an off-white outfit featuring a draped skirt, a cape, and a bralette-style blouse. Almost immediately, a section of the internet sparked a massive backlash, claiming the outfit was inappropriate for a traditional Indian festival.
While internet outrage is common, the speed at which the brand folded—despite the celebrity defending her own outfit—highlights a growing trend in Indian advertising. But why do multi-million dollar brands hit the panic button so quickly? Is it just bad public relations, or is there a deeper legal fear lurking in the shadows?
Kriti Sanon Fights Back: “Not In Her Neckline”
Before the brand took the ad down, Kriti Sanon took to Instagram to defend her clothing choices. She argued that the true essence of festivals lies in emotions and traditions, not in the garments people wear.
She pointed out that Raksha Bandhan is a bond of protection, which she celebrates by tying a Rakhi to her sister, and even extending that promise of protection to their pet dogs.
Her strongest statement, however, was aimed directly at her critics. She asked when society would stop telling women what to wear. According to the actress, ethnic fashion has evolved, yet a woman’s respect for her culture is still wrongly measured by her clothing. “Culture & Traditions are in her heart, not in her neckline!” she wrote.
The Brand Backs Down
Despite Kriti’s strong defense, the jewelry brand decided not to fight the internet. A day after her Instagram post, the brand announced they were withdrawing the advertisement from all media platforms.
In their official statement, the brand said they hold Indian culture, traditions, and festivals in the highest regard. They clarified that if the campaign inadvertently hurt the sentiments of some segments of society, it was never their intent. “Out of respect, we have withdrawn the said advertisement from all media,” the statement read.
What The Law Says: The Rules of Advertising
When a brand faces internet backlash, they are not just looking at angry comments. They are looking at the legal guidelines that govern advertising in India. The primary watchdog here is the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI).
ASCI is a self-regulatory body, meaning it is an organization formed by the advertising industry to keep itself in check. Under Chapter III of the ASCI Code, advertisements must not contain anything that is “offensive to public decency or morals.”
While a bralette and cape are completely legal to wear and show on screen, ASCI guidelines state that ads should not cause “grave and widespread offence” to the general public. When a brand receives a flood of coordinated complaints, ASCI can be forced to review the ad. To avoid an official ASCI inquiry, brands often choose to self-censor and pull the ad voluntarily.
The Threat of Criminal Complaints
The biggest fear for any brand is not a bad tweet; it is a First Information Report (FIR). In India, offended citizens frequently use criminal laws to target brands, directors, and actors for commercials they dislike.
Under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, there are specific laws dealing with public sentiments:
- Section 299 of BNS (formerly Section 295A of the IPC): This section punishes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.
- Section 302 of BNS (formerly Section 298 of the IPC): This deals with intentionally wounding the religious feelings of any person.
- Section 296 of BNS (formerly Section 294 of the IPC): This section punishes obscene acts or songs in public spaces.
Even if an advertisement like Kriti Sanon’s clearly does not meet the strict legal definition of “outraging religious feelings” or “obscenity,” the legal process in India is a punishment in itself. If an offended group files FIRs in multiple different states, the brand’s executives and the actor could be forced to travel across the country to seek bail and fight court battles. For a jewelry brand trying to sell products, this legal headache is simply not worth the cost.
Freedom of Commercial Speech
Does a brand have the right to show modern clothing in a festive ad? Yes. The Supreme Court of India has ruled in the past (such as in the landmark Tata Press case) that commercial speech—meaning advertisements—is a part of the Freedom of Speech and Expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
However, this right is not absolute. Under Article 19(2), the government can place “reasonable restrictions” on speech in the interest of public order, decency, or morality. The constant clash between a brand’s right to commercial speech and a consumer’s right to claim their “sentiments are hurt” is what leads to these sudden ad withdrawals.
Why This Matters For You
This incident is a perfect example of the “chilling effect” in law. The chilling effect happens when people or companies legally have the right to express themselves, but choose to stay silent out of fear of legal harassment or public outrage.
When brands pull ads rapidly, it sets a precedent. It shows that coordinated internet outrage is an effective tool to silence creative choices. While Kriti Sanon argued that culture lives in the heart and not in clothing, the reality of Indian advertising is that public perception—and the fear of legal trouble—will always dictate what makes it to your screens.
The Takeaway: While the law protects a brand’s right to advertise creatively, the fear of consumer boycotts and the threat of criminal complaints under the BNS often force companies to choose business safety over creative freedom.
Story reported by Latest and Trending Entertainment News, Celebrity News, Movie News, Breaking News | Entertainment – Times of India. This article is BareLaw’s independent explanation and analysis.
📲 Get every BareLaw story on Telegram — simple legal news, 5 times a day, free: t.me/barelaw
