The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday extended interim protection to Ranveer Allahabadia from arrest in connection with multiple FIRs filed against him across various jurisdictions in India.
These FIRs pertain to controversial remarks he made during a guest appearance on the television program ‘India’s Got Latent.’
The court, while granting this temporary reprieve, stipulated that such protection is contingent upon Allahabadia’s full cooperation with the ongoing investigation.
In a further directive, the Supreme Court instructed that no additional FIRs shall be registered against Allahabadia solely on the basis of statements made during the aforementioned episode of ‘India’s Got Latent.’
Additionally, the Court imposed stringent travel restrictions, mandating that he surrender his passport to law enforcement authorities and forbidding any international travel without prior judicial approval.
Previously, the Court had expressed strong disapproval of the nature of Allahabadia’s remarks and posed critical inquiries to his legal representation regarding the legal thresholds for obscenity and vulgarity.
The proceedings were in response to Allahabadia’s petition requesting the consolidation of multiple FIRs initiated against him in various states, seeking a unified legal process.
Meanwhile, the Maharashtra Police Cyber Cell has summoned Allahabadia for questioning on February 24 as part of its broader inquiry into the controversy.
The Mumbai and Guwahati police, in a joint statement, alleged that Allahabadia had remained “persistently unresponsive” to investigative summons, thereby impeding the progress of the inquiry.
Allahabadia is currently implicated in FIRs lodged by the Maharashtra Cyber Department, Guwahati Police, and Jaipur Police, all in relation to his contentious remarks on ‘India’s Got Latent.’ The allegations span multiple jurisdictions, adding complexity to the legal proceedings against him.
During the Supreme Court hearing, the justices delivered a scathing rebuke of Allahabadia’s conduct, remarking: “Just because somebody believes they have attained popularity, does that entitle them to make indiscriminate statements and take societal norms for granted? Is there anyone who would find such language acceptable? This reflects a profoundly troubling mindset, the manifestation of which is deeply objectionable.”
(Inputs By Sambhav Sharma)
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
