The Supreme Court of India on February 18, 2025, issued a restraint order against YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia and his associated influencers, preventing them from airing any more episodes of the show India’s Got Latent until further orders. This comes after Allahbadia’s comments on the show sparked widespread controversy and led to multiple FIRs being lodged against him.
Appearing for Allahbadia, senior advocate Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud informed the bench that Allahbadia had been receiving multiple death threats, including one offering a ₹5 lakh reward for cutting his tongue. Additionally, a former wrestler allegedly declared that Allahbadia should not be spared in any party where he is seen. These threats stemmed from a mere 10-second clip aired on the show, according to Bar and Bench.
The bench, led by Justice Surya Kant, expressed concern over the language used by Allahbadia during the episode, asking, “If this is not obscene, then what is? You can display vulgarity anytime and show depravity?” The court sought clarification on the parameters of obscenity and vulgarity in Indian society, stating that societal values must be considered.
When questioned about defending the language used, Chandrachud responded, “As an officer of the court, I am disgusted at the language used.” However, he also argued that the violent reactions, including threats, were disproportionate to a social media clip.
The court noted that only two FIRs, one in Mumbai and another in Assam, were officially on record. Justice Kant remarked that the issue of liberty was separate and stated, “If there were 100 FIRs, one could claim an inability to defend oneself. But that is not the case here.”
Chandrachud, however, clarified that a third FIR had been registered just days earlier. The bench further emphasized that such behavior must be condemned, asserting that popularity should not be an excuse to disregard societal norms. Justice Kant stated, “Is there anyone on earth who would appreciate this language? There is something very dirty in his mind that has been vomited out. Why should we protect him?”
The bench also alluded to allegations of Allahbadia attempting to copy content from an Australian program, stating, “We even know he has tried to copy from an Australian program, we are not sitting in an ivory tower.”
The hearing is expected to continue, with the court deliberating on free speech, obscenity laws, and judicial precedents regarding multiple FIRs for similar offenses.
Disclaimer: The information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial or investment advice. Stock market investments are subject to market risks. Always conduct your own research or consult a financial advisor before making investment decisions. Author or Business Upturn is not liable for any losses arising from the use of this information.
