The notice accuses Fernandes of making offensive and insensitive remarks in his YouTube stand-up video and a post on X (formerly Twitter), both dated April 14, 2025, that allegedly trivialise the Pahalgam terror attack and mock Indian cultural values.
Stand-up comedian Daniel Fernandes has disclosed that he was served a legal notice by two Supreme Court lawyers concerning his recent comedy set titled The Kashmir Terror Attack, where he used satire to critique media narratives, public responses, and social media reactions in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack.
The notice accuses Fernandes of making offensive and insensitive remarks in his YouTube stand-up video and a post on X (formerly Twitter), both dated April 14, 2025, that allegedly trivialise the Pahalgam terror attack and mock Indian cultural values.
In the letter addressed to Fernandes, Advocates Makarand D. Adkar and Amita Sachdeva, representing themselves as “concerned citizens of India”, wrote:
“As concerned citizens of India, we are distressed by the offensive content in your recent YouTube stand-up comedy video and X post dated April 14, 2025. These mock cultural values and trivialize the Pahalgam terror attack, causing widespread hurt.”
They demanded that Fernandes take down both the video and post by June 3, 2025, and added:
“Please find attached a notice detailing our concerns and requesting the removal of the video and post by June 3, 2025. We urge you to act responsibly to address the emotional harm caused.”
The notice, dated May 29, 2025, raises objections to the following:
- Fernandes’ YouTube video titled “The Kashmir Terror Attack – Stand-up Comedy”
- His X post captioned “Here are some jokes about parents. Enjoy.”
Daniel Fernandes clarified that his comedy was never meant to disrespect the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack, but aimed instead to encourage critical thinking about society’s collective responses and the role of the media. In his formal reply to the lawyers—which he also shared publicly—he stated, “Each of the statements cited in your notice falls within the scope of satire and social commentary.”
Refusing to remove the video, Fernandes asserted, “I firmly believe that art — no matter how provocative — should be allowed to exist.”
This incident has reignited the ongoing conversation around artistic freedom, drawing widespread support from members of the comedy and creative communities. Known for tackling political and social issues in his routines, Fernandes ended his statement with a message of unity: “Should this matter escalate further, I hope you will stand by my side — loudly.”
According to the notice, the remarks made in these clips:
“offended the sentiments of countless Indians, mocked sacred cultural and religious values, and trivialized the tragic Pahalgam terror attack of April 22, 2005, which claimed 26 lives.”
While acknowledging that stand-up comedy is a form of expression, the notice appeals to Fernandes’ sense of public responsibility:
“While such content could be subject to legal scrutiny, we appeal to your good conscience as a responsible citizen to take corrective action voluntarily at this stage.”
The notice lists multiple timestamps with direct quotes from the video, along with objections:
1. Timestamp 4:07–4:21
“Where was the home minister when all of this was happening? At home location is mentioned in the portfolio besides not knowing how a democracy works do you also not know how to read.”
Objection:
“This insults the Union Home Minister and citizens seeking accountability, undermining trust in governance during a sensitive post-attack period.”
2. Timestamp 9:28–9:45
“India has too much hate already don’t you agree we have a surplus of hate India has so much hate right now we can export it to countries like Norway and Finland.”
Objection:
“This stereotypes India as hate-filled, maligning its global image and offending citizens who value unity and diversity, especially after the Pahalgam tragedy.”
3. Timestamp 16:09–16:57
“The foreign secretary of India and his family were attacked because India declared a ceasefire yeah they were trolled because people were disappointed that the conflict ended much sooner than they thought it would… these insects they’ve been following the genocide in Palestine okay and they thought you know hm we should have gone that out over in the same time zone.”
Objection:
“Calling citizens ‘insects’ and implying they desire violence insults India’s commitment to peace, risks communal discord and offends advocates of non-violence.”
4. Timestamp 22:21–23:15
“Let’s go nuclear right let’s burn both our countries into a toxic wasteland… we can create new communities in this post-apocalyptic era where there will be no Hindus there will be no Muslims there will only be mutants and for the first time in all these years we can finally get along right and this is how you solve the Kashmir issue.”
Objection:
“This trivialises the Kashmir conflict and the Pahalgam attack, offending religious communities and disrespecting the 26 victims.”
5. Timestamp 21:33–22:02
“Today we live in a world where the truth can be whatever you want ask Arnab… I think we need to find Arnab supplier and put him in the ground just beat him beat him up like stop selling all your product to one person.”
Objection:
“This defames journalist Arnab Goswami with violent imagery, insulting media credibility and offending viewers who value responsible journalism.”
6. Timestamp 20:00–20:02
“Who doesn’t have one or two family members they wouldn’t like to see shot through.”
Objection:
“This insensitively jokes/trivialises the Pahalgam attack’s 26 deaths, offending family survivors and causing emotional harm to those affected by the tragedy.”
From Fernandes’ April 14, 2025, X post:
“You see why? Because we grow up f*cking in this country especially it’s a very Indian thing that parents are God. The whole thing like you can’t question them… everything they say is correct.”
Objection:
“This statement is seen as offensive to Indian familial values and cultural respect toward elders.”
In a post titled “Life Update”, Fernandes acknowledged receiving the notice:
“Last week, I received a notice from two Supreme Court lawyers asking me to take down my recent stand-up video on the Kashmir terror attack (and another unrelated clip).”
He added:
“They highlighted the bits they found offensive and gave me until June 3 to take the video down else face legal action.”
