Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court today asked 5 comedians, including Samay Raina, to publish their apology on their YouTube pages and other social media handles for making insensitive jokes about persons with disabilities (PwDs).

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a petition filed by M/s SMA Cure Foundation (represented by Sr Advocate Aparajita Singh) flagging the jokes made by Samay Raina, Vipun Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar a.k.a. Sonali Aditya Desai and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar. The organisation also sought guidelines to ensure that the PwDs are not lampooned.

The bench also stated that on the next date of hearing, it will decide on the penalty to be paid by the comedians. "The degree of repentance should be higher than the degree of offending, it's like purging contempt", Justice Kant said.

The comedians were personally present before the Court. The Court today dispensed with their personal appearance for the subsequent postings.

The Attorney General for India, R Venkataramani, today agreed to place on record the draft guidelines which are being proposed. The AG however added that there cannot be a "complete gag".

Sr Advocate Aparatija Singh informed the bench that "better sense have prevailed" and that the comedians have apologised. The bench expressed that humour cannot be at the expense of anyone else's honour.

"Humor is well taken and is a part of life. We laugh at ourselves. But when we start laughing at others and create a breach of sensibility...on a community plane, when humor is generated, it becomes problematic. And this is what so-called influencers of today should bear in mind. They are commercializing speech. The community at large should not be utilized to hurt the sentiments of certain sections. It's not only freedom of speech, it's commercial speech," Justice Bagachi observed.

Justice Kant observed that there should be penal consequences under the IT Act which are proportionate to the harm caused. Singh suggested that to make amends, the comedians should also use their platforms to spread awareness about disability rights.

"Go apologize on your podcasts, etc. Then consider what Ms. Aparajita has suggested. Then tell us about cost/penalty you are willing to bear," Justice Kant told the comedians.

The bench was dealing with 3 cases - two petitions filed by Youtubers Ranveer Allahabadia and Ashish Chanchlani for clubbing of FIRs lodged against them in connection with the India's Got Latent controversy, and one petition filed by M/s SMA Cure Foundation (represented by Sr Advocate Aparajita Singh) accusing comedians Samay Raina, Vipun Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar a.k.a. Sonali Aditya Desai and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar of making insensitive jokes that mocked persons with disabilities (PwDs).

Previously, the Court granted interim protection to Allahabadia and ordered release of his passport by investigating authorities. Chanchlani, on the other hand, secured interim protection from Gauhati High Court but got notice issued by the Supreme Court on his plea for clubbing of FIRs.

On May 5, the Court issued notice on SMA Cure Foundation's petition. It further directed the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai to issue notice to Raina and the other comedians to ensure that they remain present in the Court on the next date. If they fail to appear, coercive steps will be taken, the Court warned. It also sought the presence of the Attorney General for India to assist the Court, having regard to the "sensitivity and importance" of the issue raised.

On July 15, the 5 comedians entered appearance before the Court. While giving them time to file reply, the Court ordered that all, except Sonali Thakkar, shall continue to appear in-person, while Thakkar was allowed to appear online. It was added that the comedians' absence from the proceedings would be viewed seriously and no further time beyond 2 weeks would be granted to them to file their response. The Court reiterated that the issue raised in the matter is a serious one, involving right to dignity of PwDs.

Insofar as the Court's view to lay down some guidelines to prevent misuse of free speech on social media, YouTube channels, etc., the Attorney General sought time on the last date to come up with a proposal. Accommodating him, Justice Kant said that suggestions are welcome from all stakeholders and members of the Bar. The judge also notably stressed that Article 19, which provides freedom of speech and expression, cannot overpower Article 21 of the Constitution, which provides right to life and liberty (a facet of which is one's right to dignity).

Click here to read more about the cases.

Case Title:

(1) RANVEER GAUTAM ALLAHABADIA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(Crl.) No. 83/2025

(2) ASHISH ANIL CHANCHLANI Versus STATE OF GUWAHATI AND ANR., W.P.(Crl.) No. 85/2025

(3) M/S. CURE SMA FOUNDATION OF INDIA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 460/2025