Entertainment
Is the ban on Ranveer Singh lawful How it affected his subsequent Pralay and why Farhan chose not to appear in court
By - 26 May 2026 05:50 PM
In response to Ranveer Singh's abrupt departure from Farhan Akhtar's film Don 3 in December of last year, BN Tiwari, head of the Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE), told the media in Mumbai on Monday that "a superstar is not above the law." The cinema organization has now requested that its more than 4 lakh members, including technicians and employees, refrain from collaborating with Ranveer until he personally stands before them to address the matter. In the upcoming months, Ranveer plans to launch his next project, Pralay, and the mandate may make it nearly impossible to assemble a crew.Rather than being an enforceable court-mandated ban, the Federation of Western India Cine Employees' (FWICE) ban on Ranveer Singh is legally regarded as a non-cooperation directive. Legal experts generally view FWICE's decree as unenforceable because it is a trade union rather than a statutory authority. Since doing so would violate fundamental constitutional rights to livelihood, it cannot lawfully stop an actor from signing or making movies.
The Federation of Western India Cine Employees' (FWICE) ban on Ranveer Singh is legally considered a non-cooperation directive rather than an enforceable court-mandated ban. Since FWICE is a trade union rather than a legislative authority, legal experts typically consider the decree to be unenforceable. It cannot legally prevent an actor from signing or producing films since doing so would violate fundamental constitutional rights to livelihood.Rather than being an enforceable court-mandated ban, the Federation of Western India Cine Employees' (FWICE) ban on Ranveer Singh is legally regarded as a non-cooperation directive. Legal experts generally view the decree as unenforceable because FWICE is a trade union and not a legislative body. Since signing or producing a movie would violate an actor's fundamental constitutional right to a livelihood, it cannot lawfully stop them from doing so.