Reet Padda Criticizes Ranveer Singh’s ‘Dhurandhar’ as Propaganda, Questions Priyanka Chopra’s Silence

Aneet Padda’s family continues to raise concerns about the portrayal of her husband Balwant Padda’s killing in Ranveer Singh’s upcoming film “Dhurandhar,” with her sister Reet Padda now openly criticizing the project as “propaganda” while also expressing disappointment over Priyanka Chopra’s silence on the matter.

In a strongly worded social media post that has gained significant traction within film industry circles, Reet Padda questioned the ethics behind the film’s narrative, which reportedly depicts the events surrounding Balwant Padda’s death during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in India. The controversy has intensified as the film approaches its release date, with the Padda family claiming the production misrepresents crucial facts about their personal tragedy.

“What we’re seeing with ‘Dhurandhar’ is nothing short of historical revisionism packaged as entertainment,” Reet Padda stated in her post. “My sister lost her husband in horrific circumstances, and now his memory is being distorted for commercial gain.”

The Padda family’s grievances extend beyond the film’s content to include Priyanka Chopra’s apparent lack of response to their concerns. Chopra, who has no direct involvement with the film but maintains significant influence in Bollywood and Hollywood, has been criticized by the family for not using her platform to address what they describe as historical inaccuracies in the production.

Industry observers note that this controversy highlights the ongoing tensions surrounding cinematic representations of sensitive historical events in Indian cinema. The 1984 anti-Sikh riots, which followed Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination, remain one of the most traumatic chapters in modern Indian history, with thousands of Sikhs killed in organized violence.

Film critic Rajiv Menon points out that this is not the first time Bollywood has faced backlash over historical depictions. “Indian cinema has repeatedly struggled with balancing artistic license and historical accuracy, especially when dealing with communal violence or political events. The families directly affected by such tragedies often feel re-traumatized when their stories are adapted without proper consultation.”

Ranveer Singh, who plays a lead role in the film, has not directly responded to the Padda family’s criticisms. The production company behind “Dhurandhar” released a brief statement earlier this week stating that the film “aims to highlight important historical events while respecting all communities involved,” without addressing the specific allegations made by the Padda family.

The controversy raises important questions about the responsibilities of filmmakers when portraying real-life tragedies. Media ethics expert Dr. Sarita Choudhury explains: “There’s always a delicate balance between artistic freedom and ethical responsibility, particularly when dealing with recent historical events where survivors and families of victims are still alive. Consultation with affected parties isn’t just about avoiding controversy—it’s about basic human decency.”

The Padda family has indicated they are considering legal options if their concerns aren’t addressed before the film’s release. They have requested a preview screening to ensure their family’s story is not misrepresented.

Meanwhile, social media has become divided on the issue, with some users supporting the Padda family’s right to protect their narrative, while others argue for artistic freedom in cinema. Several Sikh community organizations have also voiced support for the family, calling for greater sensitivity in depictions of the 1984 riots.

As “Dhurandhar” approaches its theatrical release, the controversy underscores the broader ongoing debate in global cinema about who has the right to tell whose story, especially when it involves traumatic historical events that have left deep wounds in communities.

Neither Priyanka Chopra nor Ranveer Singh’s representatives had responded to requests for comment at the time of publication.