When Did an Emerald Need Lawyer

Kareena Kapoor Khan wore something that was just meant to be jewellery, she wore it the way one wears memory.

It was a 30-carat Bhopal emerald, her family heirloom carved with ‘Ayat-ul-Kursi’ that she wore it to Diwali, posted it on Instagram and just moved on.

But the photographs travelled! From admiration to argument, from argument to accusation, until what began as a look became a legal letter all of a sudden.

Now Kareena and Rhea Kapoor, the woman who wore it and the woman who styled it, find themselves on the same side of a notice that wants the pictures deleted and an apology in its place.

It makes you wonder, when did we start sending the law before we started a conversation?

Lawyers are asking the same thing now. And their answers say a lot more about us than they do about Kareena.

Deepika wears a saffron outfit in a song, Ranveer mimics the ‘Daiva’ tradition on stage, Imran Khan attends a protest, Sara Ali Khan visits Kedarnath or Priyanka Chopra Jonas eats prawns at her own Diwali party and all of them were scrutinised left, right and centre.

Seriously, have we reached a point where every celeb move needs to be questioned and dragged into controversy? Do these incidents really warrant legal notices, police complaints and social media outrage?

Do such notices actually mean anything?

The first thing everyone gets wrong is what a notice actually is.

“A legal notice is a pre-litigation communication, not a summons or court order. In simple terms, Kareena and Rhea are not legally bound to reply to the notice sent over the Ayat-ul-Kursi pendant,” says Sainath D.M., who specialises in dispute resolution & entertainment matters.

Abhishek Garg, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, has seen this cycle play out dozens of times too. A celebrity posts a photo, someone gets offended, a lawyer sends a notice and by evening it is prime-time news.

For Kareena, who wore her own Bhopal heirloom to a Diwali celebration, that bar is almost impossible to meet.

“These notices never become cases at all. They end with a few headlines. The few that are filed are mostly quashed by the High Court, withdrawn, or settled with an apology. Under criminal law, many of these complaints might not even reach the FIR stage,” says Garg.

Then, why does every second celeb seem to be getting one?

“Because several of these cases appear legally untenable from the start. Just feeling offended is not enough. For a case like Kareena’s to stand, the complainant would have to prove she wore her own family heirloom with deliberate and malicious intent to hurt sentiments,” Sainath says.

He draws the contrast. Sara Ali Khan being sued for `5 crore over date clashes was a contract dispute. That had legs! A notice over wearing a pendant does not.

“Social media has made the notice the perfect weapon. The posts are public, permanent and easily attributable. A notice draws immediate media attention, giving the sender leverage without filing a case. Add to that heightened sensitivity around religion, identity and reputation and the speed at which content circulates and you get the current trend,” Sainath adds.

Meanwhile, Garg is even more frank.

“It works, at least for publicity. Most of these people have no plan to go to court. The notice was not meant to scare Kareena. It was meant to make the sender famous.”

Are all these cases against celebs a stretch?

Rushad Irani, another lawyer, says yes, but with a warning.

“This creates a dangerous side effect. When there is a genuine grievance against a celebrity, that too may get swept along with all the frivolous cases. When every notice looks fake, even a real complaint starts to look fake. That is the cost of crying wolf,” he says.

“The conversion rate is also not much. Earlier, you would have learned of such things mostly in newspapers or websites. However, with the ease of accessibility on Instagram and the volume of posts, it becomes very easy to find something to be offended with.”

A top actress wears her family heirloom to her own Diwali party and politicians have picked a side!

Or, since when did a stylist’s choice need a spokesperson? Politicians should stop giving political colour to everything. Kareena did not wear Ayat-ul-Kursi to make a point, she just wore it because it was her family’s, because it was beautiful.

Highlight: Deepika wears saffron outfit in song, Ranveer mimics ‘Daiva’ tradition, Imran attends protest, Sara visits Kedarnath or Priyanka eats prawns at her own Diwali party and all of them were scrutinised left, right and centre. Seriously, have we reached a point where every celeb move needs legality?

The pendant is tied to the Islamic heritage of the Begums of Bhopal. It was commissioned as an expression of faith, not as a fashion accessory to complete a Diwali look. And that is where the hurt lies. The way it was presented, has caused concern among members of the Muslim community and people connected to the erstwhile princely state. It is not about Kareena. It is about what the pendant stands for.”

— Abbas Hafeez, Congress leader