In a dramatic hearing on Tuesday, the Bombay High Court signaled it may direct a complainant to perform community service for lodging a controversial First Information Report (FIR) against Zee TV’s new serial “Tum Se Tum Tak”. The show depicts a love story between a 46-year-old man and a 19-year-old woman, which the complainant alleged “hurt” sentiments.

A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad, while reserving orders on Zee TV’s petition to quash the FIR, strongly questioned the basis of the complaint as well as the complainant’s credibility.

“What is offensive in the serial? If we go by your idea of what is offensive, we will have to switch off the TV entirely. A 46-year-old actor falls in love with a 19-year-old girl — and that will hurt sentiments? We can understand if a show causes communal riots or tension, but here there is nothing of that sort. There is a judgment (Justice Lodha) which clearly says, if you don’t like a movie or a show, don’t watch it,” the bench observed orally.

The court expressed astonishment at the complainant, who initially gave his name to the Cyber Cell as Sunil Sharma, but during a previous court appearance identified himself as Sunil Mahendra Sharma. Official documents like his Aadhaar and PAN cards revealed yet another name — Mahendra Sanjay Sharma.

The judges grilled his counsel, asking how such inconsistencies could be justified. The explanation offered was that the complainant feared backlash for filing a case against a major media house, so he altered his name in the FIR.

The bench was unimpressed:

“We can understand anonymity, but here you say you are ABC and then turn out to be XYZ. This shows a vexatious and mischievous approach. Why didn’t you maintain proper anonymity? This conduct shows malice,” Justice Ghuge remarked.

The court noted the complainant had signed documents in three different ways in the same proceedings, adding:

“We could even order the police to register an FIR against you, but we do not get pleasure from sending people to jail. Arthur Road Jail is already full.”

Acting on a suggestion by Advocate General Dr. Birendra Saraf, the bench indicated it may direct the complainant to work for one month doing cleaning and mopping at JJ Hospital in Mumbai.

“He will have to do the community service himself — no proxies, the way he did in court,” the judges said.

The court also criticized the Cyber Cell’s nodal officer who registered the FIR without verifying the complainant’s documents.

“Your officer is not a child who got a lollipop from a stranger. To say the least, this was stupidity. He didn’t even check the complainant’s identity before filing the case or producing him before us. Let there be proper departmental action as per service rules,” the bench told the Advocate General.

The matter has now been reserved for orders, with the possibility that the complainant will be assigned community service as a consequence of his alleged mischief and misleading statements.