GIVA Withdraws Kriti Sanon’s Raksha Bandhan Advertisement After Online Backlash

Jewellery brand GIVA has withdrawn its Raksha Bandhan advertisement featuring Kriti Sanon after the campaign attracted criticism over the actor’s outfit and its inclusion of a pet dog in the festival ritual.

GIVA confirmed the withdrawal through a statement published on its official Instagram account on August 26. The company said it had removed the advertisement from “all media” out of respect for people who felt hurt by the campaign.

The advertisement formed part of GIVA’s “Furever Sibling: The Pawfect Bond, Crafted in Silver” campaign. It was designed to promote the company’s pet collection while extending the idea of siblinghood to animals regarded as members of the family.

The dispute, however, shifted attention away from the jewellery and the campaign’s intended message. Kriti’s Indo-Western outfit became the main subject of criticism, while some viewers also questioned the decision to include a dog in a Raksha Bandhan ritual.

No regulatory ruling, government action or legal order against the advertisement was identified during research. Its removal was a voluntary decision announced by GIVA.

What GIVA said while withdrawing the advertisement

In its statement, GIVA said it held Indian culture, festivals and traditions in high regard.

“We have the highest regard and deep respect for Indian culture, traditions and festivals,” the company wrote. It explained that the campaign was intended to celebrate festive occasions with the entire family and, in this instance, extend that celebration to pets.

Addressing the criticism, GIVA added: “If our recent advertisement has inadvertently hurt the sentiments of some segments of society, that was not our intent at all.”

“Out of respect, we have withdrawn the said advertisement from all media,” the statement continued.

The language is significant. GIVA acknowledged that some viewers had taken offence and confirmed the campaign’s withdrawal, but it did not state that the advertisement was created to disrespect Raksha Bandhan. Nor did the company blame Kriti, its creative team or any individual involved in the campaign.

What did the GIVA advertisement show?

The campaign featured Kriti celebrating Raksha Bandhan with her brother before extending the ritual to a pet dog.

According to GIVA’s original campaign positioning, “Furever Sibling” was created around the idea that sibling-like bonds can include pets. The advertisement was also linked to the brand’s pet collection, giving the emotional story a direct product connection.

Resha Jain, GIVA’s Chief Brand Officer, explained before the withdrawal that the campaign was inspired by changing definitions of family.

“With Furever Sibling, we wanted to honour this timeless bond while recognising that, for many today, siblinghood extends to the furry companions who become an inseparable part of our families,” she told advertising publication Exchange4media.

The visual execution combined that message with contemporary festive fashion. Kriti wore a bralette-style blouse, a cape and a draped skirt. Some social-media users considered the styling unsuitable for a traditional family festival, while others argued that a woman’s clothes should not determine the authenticity of her celebration.

How Kriti Sanon responded to the criticism

Before GIVA withdrew the advertisement, Kriti defended both its clothing choices and the inclusion of pets.

“The essence of festivals is not in the clothes you wear, it is in the emotions and meaning you hold for the traditions,” she wrote on Instagram Stories.

She also questioned the repeated scrutiny directed at women’s clothing, writing that culture and tradition should not be measured by a woman’s neckline.

Discussing the campaign’s broader interpretation of Raksha Bandhan, Kriti said she and her sister tie rakhis to each other because they believe women can offer one another the same protection traditionally associated with a brother.

For their family, she added, the accompanying prayers for health, happiness and a long life also extend to their dogs because they consider the animals part of the family.

Kriti’s sister, Nupur Sanon, subsequently shared the statement and identified herself as the person to whom Kriti had tied the rakhi. She defended her sister’s choice of clothing and rejected outside objections to the way they marked the festival.

Kangana Ranaut and Rahul Gandhi entered the debate

The controversy became more politically visible after actor and BJP MP Kangana Ranaut criticised the advertisement through Instagram Stories. She objected to the outfit used in the Raksha Bandhan setting and characterised the campaign’s execution as inappropriate.

Kriti’s subsequent statement did not name Kangana directly, but it addressed the central criticism of her clothing and the portrayal of the ritual.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi later shared Kriti’s response and defended her right to decide what to wear. His intervention expanded what began as an advertising dispute into a wider public argument about women’s autonomy, cultural representation and political messaging.

These statements contributed to the visibility of the controversy, but GIVA’s official withdrawal note did not attribute its decision to any particular celebrity or political leader. It referred more broadly to the sentiments of “some segments of society.”

Was the advertisement banned?

No. The available evidence shows that GIVA voluntarily withdrew the campaign.

There was no publicly identified order from the Advertising Standards Council of India, a court, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting or another government authority directing the brand to remove it.

Describing the advertisement as “banned” would therefore be inaccurate unless a subsequent official action emerges. “Withdrawn,” “removed” or “pulled by the brand” accurately reflects GIVA’s statement.

Why the campaign became vulnerable

The controversy illustrates a recurring challenge for brands building campaigns around religious or culturally significant festivals.

GIVA attempted to do two things simultaneously: introduce a commercial pet-jewellery collection and broaden the emotional definition of siblinghood. Either idea could have become the campaign’s main talking point.

Instead, the styling dominated the response. Once discussion shifted to whether Kriti’s outfit was appropriate, the original message about pets and changing family relationships became secondary.

Festive campaigns often depend on familiar cultural imagery because audiences approach them with established expectations. Contemporary styling or reinterpretation is not necessarily disrespectful, but brands have to anticipate that visual decisions may receive more attention than the story or product.

The withdrawal also raises a separate advertising question. Removing a campaign can limit immediate criticism, but it may create uncertainty about whether the brand continues to support its original creative idea. GIVA’s statement attempted to balance those pressures by defending its intent while withdrawing the execution.

The Celebrity Hour Take

GIVA’s advertisement did not fail because its central idea was impossible to understand. The intention to recognise pets as family was clearly connected with its pet collection and with the way many households view companion animals.

The difficulty came from the gap between the intended message and what viewers chose to discuss. In culturally sensitive advertising, the audience does not encounter the script, product and styling separately. Every creative decision contributes to how the campaign is interpreted.

GIVA’s withdrawal may reduce the immediate dispute, but the more important industry lesson lies in pre-release testing. A festive campaign that seeks to reinterpret tradition needs to anticipate objections to its imagery and decide in advance whether the brand is prepared to defend that creative position.

Kriti defended the campaign as an expression of emotional meaning and personal choice. GIVA ultimately chose withdrawal. Those responses are not identical, and neither should be presented as though the actor apologised or the company declared its original concept inherently wrong.

Sources & Verification

This report was prepared using GIVA’s official Instagram withdrawal statement, its original campaign positioning and remarks from the company’s Chief Brand Officer. Kriti Sanon’s response, Nupur Sanon’s comment and public statements by Kangana Ranaut and Rahul Gandhi were cross-checked through posts embedded or reproduced by established publications. No regulatory prohibition or legal order against the campaign was located.