Allahabadia v. Union of India

In Progress Mixed Outcome

Key Details

  • Mode of Expression
    Audio / Visual Broadcasting, Electronic / Internet-based Communication
  • Date of Decision
    February 18, 2025
  • Outcome
    Decision - Procedural Outcome, Motion Granted
  • Case Number
    IA No. 41866/2025
  • Region & Country
    India, Asia and Asia Pacific
  • Judicial Body
    Supreme (court of final appeal)
  • Type of Law
    Criminal Law
  • Themes
    Content Regulation / Censorship, Indecency / Obscenity
  • Tags
    YouTube, Prior Censorship

Content Attribution Policy

Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:

  • Attribute Columbia Global Freedom of Expression as the source.
  • Link to the original URL of the specific case analysis, publication, update, blog or landing page of the down loadable content you are referencing.

Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.

Case Analysis

Case Summary and Outcome

The Supreme Court of India granted a stay order on the criminal proceedings against the Indian YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia, who is facing multiple First Information Reports (FIR) after a controversial episode aired on a private channel on February 8, 2025. While serving as a judge on India’s Got Latent show, Allahbadia took part in a conversation that involved sexually explicit remarks. Clips from the exchange surfaced beyond the member-only channel resulting in public outrage and legal complaints. Allahbadia petitioned the Supreme Court, seeking to quash or consolidate the FIRs, a stay on investigations, protection from arrest, and lifelong security. The Court granted the stay on several conditions, one of them that Allahbadia does not upload videos to YouTube until further notice. The Court further indicated the need for effective regulatory measures that balance societal morality with the constitutional right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

 

Note: This case is still pending a final decision. Once it is issued, information on the case will be updated.


Facts

Samay Raina, an Indian YouTuber, invited Ranveer Allahbadia, another Indian YouTuber and podcaster, popularly known as “BeerBiceps,” to serve as a panelist judge on an online show called India’s Got Latent (‘The IGL Show’) in early November 2024. The IGL show’s format required contestants from across the country to showcase various talents, including singing, dancing, magic, and comedy, in 90-second performances before a panel of judges. Contestants rated themselves before performing, and if the judges’ average rating matched their self-assessment, the contestant won the full proceeds from that day’s ticket sales. Raina posts the IGL Show on its public YouTube account and some other related content on its exclusive member-only account. 

Raina and Allahbadia filmed an episode featuring Allahbadia in Mumbai on November 14, 2024, and aired it on February 8, 2025, on Raina’s exclusive, member-only YouTube channel. Allahbadia allegedly posed a hypothetical question to a contestant during the show while serving on the judging panel alongside Ashish Chanchalani, Apoorva Makhija, and Samay Raina. 

Specifically, he asked: “Would you rather watch your parents have sex every day for the rest of your life or join in once and stop it forever?”

The panel later engaged with another contestant and asked the following question: 

Samay Raina asked the contestant: If someone offers you 1 crore (rupees) to suck Ranveer’s dick, in which position would you do it?” 

Ranveer Allahbadia replied: “Not mine, Dipak Kalal’s.” 

Ranveer Allahbadia then made an explicit offer: Suck mine for 2 crore in cash.” 

Jaspreet Singh added: “Let’s go, 1 lakh extra from my side, give me your UPI number, sister fucker.”

A video clip featuring these questions later surfaced on the internet beyond the member-only channel, which triggered widespread criticism, threats, and trolling. The controversial clip subsequently led to multiple First Information Reports (FIR) and complaints filed across India against Allahbadia and another panelist under of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (prevously, Indian Penal Code) inter alia including, Section 79 (insulting the modesty of a woman), Section 95 (hiring, employing, or engaging a child to commit an offense), Section 196 (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, etc.), Section 294 (sale of obscene books, etc.), Section 296 (obscene acts and songs), and Section 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings).

Allahbadia filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, seeking to quash several FIRs registered against him in Mumbai and Guwahati concerning the episode aired on 8 February 2025. Alternatively, he requested the consolidation or transfer of the FIRs, along with a stay on their investigation and protection from arrest or coercive action. Additionally, he sought a direction preventing courts from taking cognizance of any related complaints and requested lifelong security for himself and his family.


Decision Overview

The Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings against Ranveer Allahbadia and directed that no new First Information Reports shall be filed against YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia. 

The Supreme Court of India, while refraining from passing any final judgment on content regulation, indicated the need for effective regulatory measures that balance societal morality with the constitutional right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Court suggested that the Solicitor General of India draft such measures, ensuring they remain within the reasonable restrictions of Article 19(2), and circulate them for public consultation before considering legislative or judicial action. On the petitioner’s plea to resume his YouTube show, The Ranveer Show, the Court allowed it conditionally, requiring an undertaking to maintain decency and avoid content that may influence ongoing cases. It deferred a decision on his request to travel abroad until he complies with the investigation process.

Later on the next date of hearing, the Court recorded that the investigation against Ranveer Allahabadia in Maharashtra is complete and a chargesheet is ready to be filed. Regarding the case in Assam, the Court was informed that proceedings are ongoing, with a co-accused summoned on 22 April 2025. The Court directed the Solicitor General to confirm whether the investigation concerning Allahabadia in Assam is also complete and whether he is no longer needed for further investigation.


Decision Direction

Quick Info

Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.

Mixed Outcome

Although the stay order in favor of Allahbadia marks a positive step towards the protection of freedom of expression, the condition that the YouTuber refrains from uploading further content seems like a disproportionate restriction on this right since it is a prior restraint that was imposed without justification. Indeed, the Supreme Court did not argue why it considered this measure justifiable or necessary in light of the specific content of the case. Yet, the order censors new content from Allahbadia regardless of its substance.

Global Perspective

Quick Info

Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.

Case Significance

Quick Info

Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Official Case Documents

Have comments?

Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.

Send Feedback