Anticipatory bail to UP vlogger Amrith Singh, booked by the Fort Kochi police over an Instagram video about Kashi Art Cafe, has been granted by a Sessions Court in Ernakulam, which held that bail conditions would meet the prosecution’s concerns. The prosecution alleges the video was capable of creating communal disharmony.
Kochi: Pre-arrest bail has been granted by the Court of Sessions, Ernakulam Division to a social media influencer from Uttar Pradesh accused of promoting enmity through an Instagram video recorded at Kashi Art Cafe in Fort Kochi, with the Court noting that he has no reported criminal antecedents [Amrith Singh v. State of Kerala].
The petition was filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and allowed by Sessions Judge K.K. Balakrishnan in an order dated November 6, 2026.
The order
After perusing the case diary, the Court noted that the crux of the allegation was that the video was opposed and supported by members of two religious communities, creating communal disharmony. It then held:
“He has no reported criminal antecedents. Sufficient conditions for bail only needed to address the objection raised by the prosecution against the petition. Therefore, pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner with following conditions.”
What is alleged
Amrith Singh, 34, is the sole accused in Crime No. 594/2026 of Fort Kochi Police Station, registered on October 24 on a complaint by the cafe’s manager. The sections invoked are 353(2) and 192 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which deal with statements promoting enmity between groups and wanton provocation with intent to cause riot.
The prosecution’s case is that Singh uploaded a video on October 22 through his Instagram account in which he questioned the cafe’s name, objected to an artwork in the cafe and commented on the community composition of the area. It alleges these remarks were capable of creating hatred between religious communities and public unrest. These allegations are yet to be tested; the Court has expressed no view on the merits, and Singh is presumed innocent.
Arguments on both sides
For Singh, counsel submitted that he had come to Kerala as a tourist and that the video was a travel account of his personal experiences and opinions, not aimed at any religious community. He is a filmmaker, producer and social media personality, counsel said, and no violence or communal tension had followed the video. He was ready to abide by any conditions, counsel added.
Public Prosecutor Manoj G. Krishnan seriously opposed the plea. He submitted that various organisations had held protests and demonstrations after the video circulated, creating communal disharmony. The device used was yet to be recovered, the prosecution argued, and there was a chance that Singh could influence witnesses or abscond if released.
Conditions imposed
Singh must appear before the investigating officer on or before November 17, 2026. If he is arrested after interrogation, he is to be released on a bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like sum. He must also appear before the investigating officer as and when directed in writing, must not tamper with evidence or influence or intimidate witnesses, must not commit any other offence, and must cooperate with the investigation.
What the order leaves open
The order follows the familiar approach to pre-arrest bail in speech-related cases: where the accused has no criminal record and the prosecution’s concerns relate to investigation, conditions such as appearance before the investigating officer and a bar on tampering can address them without custody.
Whether the video amounts to an offence under the BNS is not decided by the grant of anticipatory bail. That question remains open for investigation and, if a final report is filed, for trial.
Case Title: Amrith Singh v. State of Kerala
Case No.: B.A. No. 2439/2026 (Crime No. 594/2026 of Fort Kochi Police Station)
Bench: K.K. Balakrishnan, Sessions Judge, Court of Sessions, Ernakulam Division
Date of Order: November 6, 2026
Appearances: Advocates Akhil Suresh, Kalliyani Krishna B., Anita Elizabeth Babu, Rahul T. and Rajath Ratna for the petitioner; Public Prosecutor Manoj G. Krishnan for the State
