The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim protection from arrest to YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia in criminal cases lodged against him over allegedly obscene remarks made on a YouTube show, but also suggested that it would like the government to consider an anti-obscenity law for YouTube channels and social media.
A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh termed Allahbadia’s comment’s, made during an appearance on a show called India’s Got Latent “perverted,” “dirty” and “disgusting”. While calling on the Union government to inform it about a legal regime for regulating YouTube channels and other social media content, the bench added that some of the content has become a “complete nuisance”.
“If the government of India is willing to do it, very well, but we make it clear that we want something done. These YouTubers and their shows… something has to be done about them and we will do it. We are not going to leave it like it. The Union is a party to the (Allahbadia’s) petition. We will want the attorney general and solicitor general to be here on the next date of hearing,” justice Kant told additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, who was appearing for the Centre in a different matter before his bench.
Earlier, while shielding him from immediate custody, the bench came down hard on Allahbadia, commenting that the podcaster displayed a “perverted mind” in making the comments on the show.
“What he used at the show — his parents, his sister, his siblings, and the entire society are ashamed. There’s something very dirty in his mind which he vomited during that show… This is a condemnable behaviour and lack of responsibility. If someone thinks I have become someone very popular, I have a right to say anything I feel like… You are taking society for granted,” remarked the bench, slamming Allahbadia’s comments.
Despite its strong condemnation, the court agreed to protect Allahabadia from arrest, while imposing strict conditions including barring him from broadcasting any new content until further orders and restraining him from leaving India without the court’s permission.
In its order, the bench directed that Allahbadia will not be arrested in connection with the first information reports (FIRs) registered against him in Mumbai, Guwahati and Jaipur, adding no further FIRs shall be registered against him based on his comments on India’s Got Latent.
Allahbadia can approach police for his safety in view of the death threats against him, said the bench, but clarified that the podcaster must fully cooperate with the investigation and appear before the police as and when required, without lawyers accompanying him to police stations.
“Allahbadia and his associates are prohibited from broadcasting any other show until further orders,” the bench further ordered, issuing notices and seeking replies from the police authorities in Maharashtra and Assam.
Allahbadia approached the top court last week seeking consolidation of all FIRs against him and protection from arrest, citing concerns over multiple cases registered across different states. At least three FIRs have been lodged so far — one in Guwahati, one in Mumbai, and a third in Jaipur which was lodged after his petition in the top court.
When senior advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, appearing for Allahbadia, argued that the remarks may be distasteful but should not warrant criminal action, the bench countered: “Are you justifying his statements?” To this, Chandrachud responded: “Absolutely not. I am personally disgusted, but does it amount to a criminal act is the real question.”
Unmoved, the court questioned: “What are the parameters of obscenity, according to you? In this country, if this isn’t obscenity, what else can be? Just because you have a Supreme Court judgment that sought to guide what obscenity is, does it give you a license to speak anything?”
The bench underscored that the issue went beyond individual morality. “It’s not just a question of arousing lustful thought. A society has broad parameters and values, and as a civilized person, you accept those values,” it said.
On Chandrachud’s emphasis on life threats to Allahbadia, the bench bemoaned the growing trend of internet personalities using vulgarity for online fame. “If you want to gain cheap popularity by speaking vulgar language, perhaps someone else is also doing the same by issuing these threats,” commented the court, referring to the threats of violence against Allahbadia.
The bench further questioned Allahbadia’s attempt to seek protection citing some of the court judgments relating to journalists facing multiple FIRs. “We aren’t sitting in an ivory tower. We have seen how he tried to copy this statement from an international channel. But there’s a license and restricted viewership for such channels,” the court said.
While Chandrachud contended that India’s Got Latent was meant for a subscription-based audience, the bench pointed out that the content was readily available on YouTube, arguing that it could not be considered restricted media.
Allahbadia and his co-panelists, including comedian Samay Raina, have faced severe backlash following the controversial episode. The National Commission for Women (NCW) has summoned Allahbadia, Raina, and other show producers to appear before them in New Delhi. Meanwhile, Mumbai and Assam police teams have repeatedly visited Allahbadia’s Mumbai residence, but officers found the flat locked.
The case has sparked a broader debate on the regulation of digital content and the limits of free speech in the age of social media. The controversy also reached Parliament last week, where Shiv Sena MP Naresh Mhaske has demanded stricter laws for online content creators.
In an attempt to contain the controversy, Allahbadia issued a video apology last week, calling his remarks a “lapse in judgment”, but the outrage has continued to mount. Facing escalating backlash, Raina also announced on February 12 that he was deleting all episodes of India’s Got Latent and pledged full cooperation with investigating agencies.