New Delhi, India – February 14, 2025
Renowned YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia has moved the Supreme Court of India, seeking the clubbing of multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) filed against him following allegedly obscene remarks made during his guest appearance on the YouTube show India’s Got Latent. The case, which has sparked widespread public outrage and legal scrutiny, is expected to be heard soon, as per Chief Justice of India (CJI Sanjiv Khanna), who acknowledged a mention by Allahbadia’s legal counsel.
The controversy erupted when a clip from the show went viral, featuring Allahbadia posing a highly inappropriate and explicit question to a contestant:
“Watch your parents have sex every day for the rest of your life, or join in once and stop it forever?”
The video, which quickly gained traction on social media platforms, has been met with strong condemnation from various sections of society, including legal experts, social activists, and political leaders.
Legal Action and FIRs Against Allahbadia and Others
Following the backlash, the Maharashtra Cyber Department lodged an FIR against Ranveer Allahbadia, comedian Samay Raina, and other artists associated with the show, citing obscenity and violation of the Information Technology Act.
Key legal developments include:
✔ Cyber Department’s Case: Registered under relevant sections of the IT Act and Indian Penal Code (IPC) for creating and disseminating obscene content.
✔ Content Removal Orders: Authorities have sought the removal of all 18 episodes of India’s Got Latent, citing repeated use of vulgar and explicit language.
✔ Multiple FIRs Filed: Complaints have been registered in various states, leading to Allahbadia’s appeal for consolidation of cases to avoid multiple legal proceedings across jurisdictions.
The Supreme Court’s Role: Clubbing of FIRs and Legal Precedents
Allahbadia’s legal team has argued that multiple FIRs for the same alleged offense violate legal precedents, citing previous Supreme Court rulings that emphasize:
✔ Consolidation of identical complaints to prevent harassment and unnecessary litigation.
✔ Jurisdictional consistency, ensuring that a single court adjudicates similar allegations.
✔ Protection of free speech and content creators, given the evolving digital media landscape.
The Supreme Court is expected to deliberate on whether the nature of the remarks falls under legally defined obscenity, and if multiple complaints necessitate a centralized investigation.
Social and Industry Reactions
The controversy has ignited a larger debate on content regulation in digital media, with industry voices weighing in:
✔ Freedom of Speech vs. Responsible Content Creation – While content creators defend creative expression, legal experts stress responsibility in public discourse.
✔ Digital Content Censorship Concerns – The government’s move to remove entire episodes raises concerns over overreach and online censorship.
✔ Public Sentiment Divided – While a section of the audience demands stricter regulation, others argue against excessive legal intervention in comedic and entertainment content.