Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Ranveer Allahabadia, Rebukes His Comments

Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Ranveer Allahabadia Amid Multiple FIRs

New Delhi: On Tuesday, the Supreme Court provided interim protection to YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahabadia from arrest in connection with several FIRs filed against him across India. The charges stem from controversial comments he made during a guest appearance on the show India’s Got Latent. The Court’s ruling allows Allahabadia to avoid arrest, provided he fully cooperates with the investigation.

In its order, the Supreme Court also stated that no further FIRs could be filed against Allahabadia related to his appearance on the show. However, the Court instructed him to surrender his passport to the authorities and barred him from leaving the country without prior permission.

Earlier, the Court expressed its dissatisfaction with Allahabadia’s remarks during his appearance on the show, raising questions about the boundaries of obscenity and vulgarity in public discourse. The Court asked Allahabadia’s lawyer to clarify the legal parameters of what constitutes offensive language.

This development comes as Allahabadia filed a plea seeking the consolidation of the various FIRs lodged against him for his controversial comments. He had requested that the multiple cases be combined into one for more efficient handling.

The Maharashtra Police’s Cyber Cell has now summoned Allahabadia to join the investigation on February 24. The authorities are investigating his comments, which sparked widespread backlash. FIRs have been filed by police departments from Maharashtra, Guwahati, and Jaipur in relation to the incident.

Earlier, the police in Mumbai and Guwahati noted that Allahabadia had been "unreachable" and "out of contact with investigative agencies" as they sought his cooperation in the probe.

During today’s hearing, the Supreme Court strongly condemned Allahabadia’s remarks. "Just because someone becomes popular, does that give them the right to speak any kind of words and disregard societal norms?" the Court asked. "Is there anyone on earth who would tolerate such language? There is something deeply inappropriate in his mindset that has been publicly expressed."