Supreme Court to hear Ranveer Allahbadia’s plea today over FIRs tied to comments on “India’s Got Latent.” The petition challenges multiple cases filed for his remarks on sex and parenting.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a petition Today (April 1) filed by podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia regarding multiple FIRs lodged against him for his remarks about parents and sex on comic Samay Raina’s YouTube show “India’s Got Latent.”
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh is expected to address the matter.
On March 3, the Supreme Court permitted Allahbadia to continue his podcast “The Ranveer Show,” provided he maintains “morality and decency” and ensures it is appropriate for viewers of all ages.
This decision followed Allahbadia’s argument that the podcast is his sole source of income, supporting around 280 employees. The court modified its previous order from February 18, which had prohibited Allahbadia and his associates from airing any content on YouTube or other audio-visual platforms.
Allahbadia, who is widely known as BeerBiceps, is facing multiple FIRs for his comments made on Raina’s show. The bench also extended the interim protection from arrest for Allahbadia until further notice, while instructing him to cooperate with the investigation in Guwahati.
Also Read: India’s Got Latent | Supreme Court to Hear Ranveer Allahbadia’s Plea Today (Feb 18)
Additionally, the Supreme Court broadened the scope of the proceedings, directing the Centre to draft a regulatory framework for social media content.
The court also scheduled YouTuber Ashish Chanchlani’s plea for the consolidation of the FIRs alongside Allahbadia’s similar request.
The Supreme Court, On February 18, granted interim protection from arrest to Allahbadia, labeling his remarks as “vulgar” and stating he had a “dirty mind” that brought shame to society. In addition to Allahbadia and Raina, the case in Assam also names comics Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija.
Earlier, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma announced via X (formerly Twitter) that the Guwahati Police registered an FIR against several well-known YouTubers and social media influencers for allegedly promoting obscenity.
The accused include Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, Apoorva Makhija, Ranveer Allahbadia, and Samay Raina, among others.
The FIR filed against the influencers for engaging in sexually explicit and vulgar discussions in a show titled ‘India’s Got Latent.’
PREVIOUSLY IN APEX COURT
The Supreme Court on Monday permitted YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia, popularly known as BeerBiceps, to resume hosting The Ranveer Show, provided he ensures that the content adheres to general standards of morality and decency.
Previously, the Court had granted him interim protection from arrest under several conditions, including a ban on appearing in any show.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh issued the order in response to Allahbadia’s petition, following multiple criminal cases filed against him nationwide over controversial remarks made by him and others during a judges’ panel discussion on India’s Got Latent.
“Subject to the petitioner furnishing an undertaking that his podcast shows will maintain the desired standards of morality and decency so that viewers of any age group can watch, the petitioner is PERMITTED TO RESUME THE RANVEER SHOW.”
-Apex Court Held
During the hearing, his lawyer, Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, argued that this restriction was impacting not only Allahbadia’s livelihood but also the jobs of his 280 employees.
“We have moved an application. We are seeking lifting of one part of the order which refrained him from airing his shows etc. He has no sense of humour at all.. but he has 280 employees and it is his livelihood. It can be ordered that let no profane words be uttered.”
The Solicitor General (SG) disagreed and said,
“This is an isolated case. It is not vulgar but it is perverse. I saw the show also out of curiosity.. humour is one thing, vulgarity is one thing, and perversity is another level. Leave alone man and woman.. me and AG cannot see it together. The judges cannot see it together. Let him stay quiet for some time .. Assam called him. He did not come.”
Justice Surya Kant responded,
“Instruct your IO. Let him know the date and time. He is obligated and he will join. Now on the show. He was called to a show as a speaker.. it was not his show..”
The SG insisted,
“No one can watch that show also.”
Justice Kant agreed, saying,
“Yes Mr. Abhinav also said that he too cannot defend the language.”
Justice Kant further commented,
“There are some people who are writing articles on free speech etc .. we know how to handle them also. Every fundamental right is followed by duty. There are restrictions also.”
Justice Kant also mentioned,
“We hope he may have repentance for what he has done. Now on his own channel.. he will not use any language.. which does not violate moral fabric of society… irrespective of age group. Subject to such moral and decency standards..”
The SG then clarified,
“I don’t want to come in the way of it.”
The Supreme Court recognized that Ranveer Allahbadia employs many people and said,
“Yea there are 280 employees and even their families are at stake.”
The SG suggested that proper guidelines need to be made and said,
“Something needs to be done. Some guidelines need to be laid. Our notions of morality are far different from other countries. In US burning flag is a fundamental right under first amendment and it is a Criminal offence here..”
The Supreme Court acknowledged,
“But we have right to expression, right to speech subject to of course..”
Justice Kant made it clear that the court does not support strict censorship but also does not support a completely unregulated platform.
“But we don’t want any regulatory regime which is about censorship.. but it also cannot be a free for all platform.”
He gave an example of a senior comedian,
“There is a person who is now 75 and does a humorous show.. you should see how it is done. Full family can watch it. That is what talent is. Using filthy language is not talent. There is an element of creativity and talent.”
The SG agreed,
“Yea there are so many comedians who employ good behavior and critique the govt strongly.”
The Supreme Court discussed how some regulatory measures could be useful without restricting free speech too much.
“What can be a limited regulatory measure which can have some control but also not leading to censorship. Everyone has the right to watch what they want. But just because you have commercial interests it cannot be you can say something.”
The SG supported this and added,
“I am all for something so that a methodology is laid down without impinging on someone’s freedom of expression. Free expression should be protected but vulgarity and perversity should not reach our children.”
The Supreme Court emphasized the need to involve all stakeholders in the process,
“Let something be laid down. Let all stakeholders be involved. Let us see what the society is capable to take in and what can be fed. Let us invite the people, bar, and other stakeholders to see what are the measures which are needed.”
The court also pointed out that the Indian Constitution has provisions to balance free speech with morality,
“If you see Article 19(4) it has restriction of public order or morality. This is the afterthought of the constitution makers. It is such a wonderfully drafted document and we need to respect the whim of the makers which represents the will of the entire Indian citizenry.”
Finally, the Supreme Court concluded,
“Ld AG and SG present. They submit that in order to prevent telecast or airing of programs which are not acceptable to the known norms of our society, some regulatory measures may be required. We have requested SG to deliberate upon and suggest such measures which shall not impinge the fundamental right of free speech and expression but also effective enough to ensure that it is within bounds of 19(4). Any draft regulatory measures shall be brought in public domain to invite suggestions from all stakeholders before taking any legislative or judicial measure in this regard. We are inclined to expand the scope of this proceeding.”
Regarding the Assam investigation, the Supreme Court noted,
“SG submits that petitioner has not joined probe in Assam. Petitioner says he had messaged on WhatsApp and has not heard back. Let the IO fix a date and time for the purposes of him to join the probe.”
CASE TITLE:
RANVEER GAUTAM ALLAHABADIA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
W.P.(Crl.) No. 83/2025
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Ranveer Allahbadia
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
