LawChakra

Lawyer Abhinav Chandrachud Defends Ranveer Allahbadia In SC: ‘Nupur Sharma’s Statement Was Worse’

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Today, On 18th February, lawyer Abhinav Chandrachud referenced ex-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma’s controversial remarks while defending Ranveer Allahbadia. The court, however, ordered Allahbadia to surrender his passport to Maharashtra’s Thane police and barred him from leaving the country without approval. Additionally, he has been prohibited from participating in stand-up comedy or ‘roast’ shows until further notice.

New Delhi: Abhinav Chandrachud, son of former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, appeared before the Supreme Court on Tuesday to represent YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia.

The hearing concerned a plea from Allahbadia seeking to consolidate multiple FIRs and obtain anticipatory bail to prevent arrest by the Guwahati Police.

During the proceedings, Abhinav brought up the 2022 case involving former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma.

He argued that one of the accused in the current case had received threats of acid attacks, asserting,

“The statement was worse in that case.”

He further claimed that a threat had been made to cut off Ranveer’s tongue, with a reward of Rs 5 lakh for doing so.

Following the hearing, reactions poured in on social media regarding Abhinav’s arguments.

One X user named Incognito criticized him for making a “false” equivalence to secure bail for Allahbadia, stating,

“While pleading for relief Ranveer Allahbadia’s lawyer Abhinav Chandrachud dragged Nupur Sharma into this controversy out of nowhere and said her statements were far worse than Ranveer Allahbadia’s. This false equivalence to get bail for Ranveer Allahbadia is condemnable. Nupur still can’t go out without security. Ranveer will be doing his podcasts after 2-3 months.”

The Supreme Court also reprimanded Allahbadia for his comments made on the online show “India’s Got Latent.”

Although the bench, consisting of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, granted relief to the petitioner, it condemned his remarks, stating,

“There has to be a height of lack of responsibility. This kind of condemnable behavior… that somebody thinks himself that I can, because now I have become so and so popular and therefore I can speak any kind of words and that I can take the entire society for granted.”

The court ordered that no additional police cases be filed against him regarding the same issue.

However, it required him to surrender his passport to the police in Thane, Maharashtra, and prohibited him from leaving the country without court approval.

Additionally, the court barred him from participating in any further ‘stand-up comedy’ or ‘roast’ shows until further notice.





Exit mobile version