Khandaani Shafakhana presents golden opportunity to lift stigma attached to sexual diseases: HChttps://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/khandaani-shafakhana-golden-opportunity-to-lift-stigma-sexual-diseases-hc-5884403/

Khandaani Shafakhana presents golden opportunity to lift stigma attached to sexual diseases: HC

A plea filed by Delhi-based sexologist claimed that the title of Sonakshi Sinha starrer Khandaani Shafakhana was defamatory.

Delhi HC Khandani Shafakhana
Khandaani Shafakhana stars Sonakshi Sinha as sex clinic inheritor Baby Bedi.

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the title of the movie Khandaani Shafakhana, saying it presents a golden opportunity to approach a larger cross-section of the society on the need to impart sex education and for lifting stigma attached to sexual diseases and their treatment.

Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, in his judgement, said the movie showed the societal transformation brought about on the subject.

The court’s observations came on a plea filed by Vijay Abbot, a Delhi based sexologist who had alleged that the film defames him and his profession.

“I had risen after viewing the film thinking that it presents a golden opportunity to the plaintiff and other practitioners in the field, to, though till now found publishing their advertisements in local newspapers, approach the larger cross-section of the society on the subject of need to impart sex education and for lifting the stigma and taboo attached to sexual diseases and treatment thereof and to commence a countrywide dialogue from the platform offered by the film,” the judgement said.

Advertising

The movie, starring Sonakshi Sinha in the lead, has already hit the screens on August 2.

The word ‘Khandaani’ connotes familial or clannish and ‘shafakhana’ means a hospital or a clinic. The words combined convey a family hospital or a family clinic.

The court also noted that Abbot has not seen the potential the film offers to him, to go out in the open and benefit the public at large.

“I also wondered, whether on the plaintiff and others so using the platform of the film, to propagate openness in the matter, it would be the turn of the defendants to sue the plaintiff for deriving undue benefit/mileage from the film. Alas! the plaintiff, in spite of viewing the film, has not seen the potential the film offers to him, to go out in the open and benefit not only himself but the public at large therefrom,” the judge said.

The court said sexual disorders are viewed in the society as an abnormality which restricts people from seeking treatment, in turn depriving the sexologists of the stature and respect in the society as given to other medical practitioners.

“There is no gain saying that till date sexual disorders are viewed in the society as an abnormality and not as a curable disease, with those in need of treatment shying therefrom for the fear of same becoming public knowledge, resulting in their becoming object of ridicule.

“The same is obviously to the prejudice of general practitioners thereof, who are because of the stigma attached to their profession, also deprived of the stature and respect in the society as accorded to other medical practitioners. The film, in two hours duration thereof, shows the societal transformation brought about on the subject,” said the judgement.