The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 18 February 2025, granted interim protection from arrest to YouTuber Ranveer Allahabadia (popularly known as Beer Biceps) in connection with multiple FIRs registered against him in Mumbai, Guwahati, and Jaipur. The charges relate to alleged obscenity over his comments during an episode of the show “India’s Got Latent.”
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh issued the interim order, directing that no further FIRs be registered against Allahabadia based on the controversial episode. The bench also issued notices to the Union of India, the State of Maharashtra, and the State of Assam, while hearing the writ petition filed by Allahabadia.
The interim protection comes with several conditions:
- Allahabadia must join the investigation when summoned by the Investigating Officers.
- He is required to fully cooperate with the investigation and cannot be accompanied by any counsel inside the police stations.
- He is to deposit his passport with the Investigating Officer at Thane police station.
- Allahabadia must not leave the country without the permission of the Supreme Court.
- He and his associates are prohibited from airing any other shows until further orders.
The Court also gave Allahabadia the liberty to approach the local police in Maharashtra and Assam for protection if he faces any threat to his life and liberty, which could prevent him from joining the investigation.
Although the Court granted interim relief, Justice Kant was highly critical of the language used by Allahabadia, labeling it as “dirty” and “perverted.”
“Are you defending the kind of language?” Justice Kant questioned Allahabadia’s lawyer, Advocate Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud. Chandrachud admitted that he was personally “disgusted” by the language used by his client but argued that the issue at hand was whether the language rose to the level of a criminal offence.
“If this is not obscenity, then what is obscenity? Is the judgment [in the Apoorva Arora case] a license to say whatever you want?” Justice Kant retorted, seeming unconvinced by the lawyer’s argument.
Further criticizing Allahabadia’s remarks, Justice Kant remarked, “There is something very dirty in his mind, which has been vomited by him in the program…He is insulting parents also. Why should the Courts favor him?”
During the hearing, Justice Kant described the offensive remarks as deeply troubling: “The words which you have used, parents will feel shamed. Sisters and daughters will feel ashamed. Entire society will feel shamed. It shows a perverted mind.”
Chandrachud also mentioned the multiple FIRs filed across the country, including one in Jaipur. However, Justice Kant clarified that as of the hearing, only two FIRs had been registered, one in Mumbai and another in Guwahati. The judge referred to the different nature of the FIRs, stating that one related to offensive language used against individuals from Arunachal Pradesh. “The dirty language, humiliating FIR used against the persons of Arunachal Pradesh is the subject of the other FIR,” said Justice Kant.
Chandrachud also referred to the Nupur Sharma case, where the Court granted relief despite the controversial remarks made by Sharma. He argued that his client was receiving death threats. Justice Kant responded to these concerns, stating that while threats are unfortunate, “If you can try to attain cheap publicity by saying these kind of things, there might be others also who might want to get cheap publicity by making threats.”
The bench also raised concerns about the involvement of Allahabadia’s lawyer in visiting the police station. “Why did the lawyer go? Under which law? Just because you can pay and lawyers will start rendering these services? This is insulting the [lawyers’] dress also,” Justice Kant remarked.
Chandrachud added that Allahabadia’s mother, a doctor, had also received threats from individuals posing as patients. Justice Kant responded sharply, saying, “What embarrassment he has caused to [his] parents!”
In his defense, Chandrachud emphasized that the show “India’s Got Latent” was accessible only to restricted, paid adult subscribers. The controversy arose when a 10-second video clip, recorded by one of the subscribers, went viral on social media. The Court noted that, in other countries, such shows typically included content warnings and disclaimers, which were lacking in this episode.
The episode, featuring YouTubers including Allahabadia, Samay Raina, Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija, sparked widespread outrage after clips surfaced online. Following the backlash, Raina issued a public apology and removed the episodes from his YouTube channel. Allahabadia also apologized for his comments, admitting that they were inappropriate.
The controversy escalated when, on February 10, the Guwahati Police registered an FIR against five YouTubers for allegedly promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit discussions. The Maharashtra Cyber Department and Jaipur Police followed suit with their own investigations.
On February 14, Advocate Chandrachud sought the intervention of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, citing concerns about possible coercive action by the Assam police. However, CJI Khanna did not respond further.
Notably, in 2024, Allahabadia received the “Disruptor of the Year” award at the National Creators Award presented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
(With inputs from LiveLaw)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
‘There Is Something Very Dirty In His Mind, Entire Society Will Feel Shamed”, SC Reprimands YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia In Obscene Remarks Case, Grants Interim Relief
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 18 February 2025, granted interim protection from arrest to YouTuber Ranveer Allahabadia (popularly known as Beer Biceps) in connection with multiple FIRs registered against him in Mumbai, Guwahati, and Jaipur. The charges relate to alleged obscenity over his comments during an episode of the show “India’s Got Latent.”
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh issued the interim order, directing that no further FIRs be registered against Allahabadia based on the controversial episode. The bench also issued notices to the Union of India, the State of Maharashtra, and the State of Assam, while hearing the writ petition filed by Allahabadia.
The interim protection comes with several conditions:
The Court also gave Allahabadia the liberty to approach the local police in Maharashtra and Assam for protection if he faces any threat to his life and liberty, which could prevent him from joining the investigation.
Although the Court granted interim relief, Justice Kant was highly critical of the language used by Allahabadia, labeling it as “dirty” and “perverted.”
“Are you defending the kind of language?” Justice Kant questioned Allahabadia’s lawyer, Advocate Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud. Chandrachud admitted that he was personally “disgusted” by the language used by his client but argued that the issue at hand was whether the language rose to the level of a criminal offence.
“If this is not obscenity, then what is obscenity? Is the judgment [in the Apoorva Arora case] a license to say whatever you want?” Justice Kant retorted, seeming unconvinced by the lawyer’s argument.
Further criticizing Allahabadia’s remarks, Justice Kant remarked, “There is something very dirty in his mind, which has been vomited by him in the program…He is insulting parents also. Why should the Courts favor him?”
During the hearing, Justice Kant described the offensive remarks as deeply troubling: “The words which you have used, parents will feel shamed. Sisters and daughters will feel ashamed. Entire society will feel shamed. It shows a perverted mind.”
Chandrachud also mentioned the multiple FIRs filed across the country, including one in Jaipur. However, Justice Kant clarified that as of the hearing, only two FIRs had been registered, one in Mumbai and another in Guwahati. The judge referred to the different nature of the FIRs, stating that one related to offensive language used against individuals from Arunachal Pradesh. “The dirty language, humiliating FIR used against the persons of Arunachal Pradesh is the subject of the other FIR,” said Justice Kant.
Chandrachud also referred to the Nupur Sharma case, where the Court granted relief despite the controversial remarks made by Sharma. He argued that his client was receiving death threats. Justice Kant responded to these concerns, stating that while threats are unfortunate, “If you can try to attain cheap publicity by saying these kind of things, there might be others also who might want to get cheap publicity by making threats.”
The bench also raised concerns about the involvement of Allahabadia’s lawyer in visiting the police station. “Why did the lawyer go? Under which law? Just because you can pay and lawyers will start rendering these services? This is insulting the [lawyers’] dress also,” Justice Kant remarked.
Chandrachud added that Allahabadia’s mother, a doctor, had also received threats from individuals posing as patients. Justice Kant responded sharply, saying, “What embarrassment he has caused to [his] parents!”
In his defense, Chandrachud emphasized that the show “India’s Got Latent” was accessible only to restricted, paid adult subscribers. The controversy arose when a 10-second video clip, recorded by one of the subscribers, went viral on social media. The Court noted that, in other countries, such shows typically included content warnings and disclaimers, which were lacking in this episode.
The episode, featuring YouTubers including Allahabadia, Samay Raina, Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija, sparked widespread outrage after clips surfaced online. Following the backlash, Raina issued a public apology and removed the episodes from his YouTube channel. Allahabadia also apologized for his comments, admitting that they were inappropriate.
The controversy escalated when, on February 10, the Guwahati Police registered an FIR against five YouTubers for allegedly promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit discussions. The Maharashtra Cyber Department and Jaipur Police followed suit with their own investigations.
On February 14, Advocate Chandrachud sought the intervention of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, citing concerns about possible coercive action by the Assam police. However, CJI Khanna did not respond further.
Notably, in 2024, Allahabadia received the “Disruptor of the Year” award at the National Creators Award presented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
(With inputs from LiveLaw)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.