The Bombay High Court on Friday granted permanent protection from arrest to stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra in connection with an FIR filed against him for allegedly referring to Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde as a “gaddar” (traitor) during a comedy performance.
Background of the Case
The FIR was filed after Kamra made the remark during his stand-up show Naya Bharat, a comment seen as a reference to Shinde’s dramatic political defection from the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena to join forces with the BJP—an event that caused a major split in the party and the formation of a new ruling coalition.
Shiv Sena MLA Muraji Patel lodged the complaint, leading to Kamra being booked under Sections 353(1)(b), 353(2), and 356(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The FIR was registered at Mumbai’s Khar Police Station, despite Kamra residing in Tamil Nadu.
Court’s Directions
A bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and SM Modak refused to stay the investigation but ruled that any police inquiry must take place in Chennai. The Court also stated that if the Mumbai Police files a chargesheet while Kamra’s petition is pending, the trial court must not proceed against him.
Kamra’s Legal Argument:
Representing Kamra, Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai argued that the FIR was filed hastily—within just over an hour of police receiving information—and lacked proper preliminary inquiry. He described the process as “perverse” and said it reflected “non-application of mind.”
He also objected to the use of criminal defamation laws, pointing out that defamation is a non-cognizable offence that should be pursued through a private complaint. Seervai stressed that Kamra’s performance was a form of political satire, protected by the right to free speech.“You may not like it. You will be criticised. One judgment says politicians should have thick skin. It can’t be used to crush freedom of speech,” he argued.
Safety Concerns
Seervai informed the Court that Kamra has received hundreds of death threats since the controversy, including threats of physical violence and posters calling for his execution. Despite this, the police insisted on his personal appearance for questioning, raising concerns for his safety.
State’s Response
Pblic Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, appearing for the State, defended the FIR and the application of BNS sections. He argued that Kamra’s remarks were not satire but a targeted attack that caused public unrest, including vandalism at the show venue and incidents in Thane.
He acknowledged that defamation under Section 356 is a non-cognizable offence but maintained the FIR was valid because it included other cognizable charges. The State also assured the Court that Kamra would receive protection if he requested it.
The court has reserved its decision on Kamra’s plea to quash the FIR. In the meantime, the interim protection from arrest—first granted on April 16—has been made permanent.
Kamra remains free from arrest as the case continues, with the High Court making it clear that the trial court cannot take further action until a final decision is made.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International