AgenciesThe Supreme Court on Monday issued a strong directive to five social media influencers, including comedian and “India’s Got Latent” host Samay Raina, instructing them to appear before the court in response to allegations that they mocked persons with disabilities and individuals suffering from Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) — a rare genetic disorder. The court warned that failure to appear would result in coercive legal action.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh expressed deep concern over the alleged derogatory content, describing it as “damaging” and “demoralising” to the disabled community. The court emphasized that while the right to freedom of speech and expression is protected under the Constitution, it is not an absolute right and cannot be used as a shield to demean others, especially vulnerable groups.
The court's intervention came in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO Cure SMA Foundation of India, which alleged that the content in question ridiculed people suffering from SMA and other disabilities. The petition also pointed to a lack of statutory guidelines governing offensive and discriminatory online content and requested the court to formulate comprehensive regulations to safeguard the dignity of disabled individuals in the digital space.
The bench directed the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, to serve notices to the five influencers to ensure their presence during the next hearing. These include Raina, as well as other popular internet personalities like podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia (who was previously granted interim protection from arrest), Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija. The court added that failure to appear would lead to the use of coercive measures.
Justice Surya Kant noted that while the court’s decision might spark debate around the limits of free speech, it was well within its rights to uphold dignity and equality for all citizens. “After this order, many may start writing articles on freedom of expression, but we know how to handle these issues,” he said.
Earlier this year, both Maharashtra and Assam police had booked Raina and Allahbadia over their alleged comments during an episode of the YouTube show “India’s Got Latent.” The Supreme Court, during that hearing, had criticised the vulgar nature of the remarks, describing them as shameful and reflective of a “dirty mind.”
On Monday, the court also issued fresh notices to four other influencers: Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar (also known as Sonali Aditya Desai), and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar. It also made the Maharashtra government a party to the case and sought responses from all involved parties by July 15.
In its PIL, Cure SMA Foundation of India highlighted the absence of a clear legal framework addressing the representation and protection of people with disabilities in digital media. The NGO argued that this legislative gap undermines constitutional guarantees like the right to dignity, equality (Article 14), and life (Article 21), as well as provisions under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act.
The court acknowledged the sensitivity and gravity of the issue and called upon Attorney General R Venkataramani to assist in the case, especially with regard to potentially drafting new guidelines for online content concerning persons with disabilities and rare disorders.
Senior advocate Aprajita Singh, appearing for the NGO, told the court that the case amounts to hate speech, which cannot be permitted under any constitutional provision. The court agreed and said that immediate legal remedies — both punitive and preventive — must be explored to stop the spread of such harmful content.
In its concluding remarks, the bench stressed the long-term harm caused by such derogatory portrayals, noting that decades of social progress and inclusion efforts could be undone by a single act of insensitivity. The matter is now scheduled for further hearing on July 15.
#Pahalgam Terrorist Attack
The court's intervention came in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO Cure SMA Foundation of India, which alleged that the content in question ridiculed people suffering from SMA and other disabilities. The petition also pointed to a lack of statutory guidelines governing offensive and discriminatory online content and requested the court to formulate comprehensive regulations to safeguard the dignity of disabled individuals in the digital space.
The bench directed the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, to serve notices to the five influencers to ensure their presence during the next hearing. These include Raina, as well as other popular internet personalities like podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia (who was previously granted interim protection from arrest), Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija. The court added that failure to appear would lead to the use of coercive measures.
Justice Surya Kant noted that while the court’s decision might spark debate around the limits of free speech, it was well within its rights to uphold dignity and equality for all citizens. “After this order, many may start writing articles on freedom of expression, but we know how to handle these issues,” he said.
Earlier this year, both Maharashtra and Assam police had booked Raina and Allahbadia over their alleged comments during an episode of the YouTube show “India’s Got Latent.” The Supreme Court, during that hearing, had criticised the vulgar nature of the remarks, describing them as shameful and reflective of a “dirty mind.”
On Monday, the court also issued fresh notices to four other influencers: Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar (also known as Sonali Aditya Desai), and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar. It also made the Maharashtra government a party to the case and sought responses from all involved parties by July 15.
In its PIL, Cure SMA Foundation of India highlighted the absence of a clear legal framework addressing the representation and protection of people with disabilities in digital media. The NGO argued that this legislative gap undermines constitutional guarantees like the right to dignity, equality (Article 14), and life (Article 21), as well as provisions under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act.
The court acknowledged the sensitivity and gravity of the issue and called upon Attorney General R Venkataramani to assist in the case, especially with regard to potentially drafting new guidelines for online content concerning persons with disabilities and rare disorders.
Senior advocate Aprajita Singh, appearing for the NGO, told the court that the case amounts to hate speech, which cannot be permitted under any constitutional provision. The court agreed and said that immediate legal remedies — both punitive and preventive — must be explored to stop the spread of such harmful content.
In its concluding remarks, the bench stressed the long-term harm caused by such derogatory portrayals, noting that decades of social progress and inclusion efforts could be undone by a single act of insensitivity. The matter is now scheduled for further hearing on July 15.
(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.
Read More News on
(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.
