Supreme Court Criticizes Beer Biceps: ‘Ranveer Allahbadia’s Mind Seems Filled With Filth’

New Delhi, 18th February 2025: The Supreme Court on Tuesday, February 18, granted interim protection from arrest to YouTuber Ranveer Allahabadia, popularly known as Beer Biceps, in connection with FIRs filed in Mumbai, Guwahati, and Jaipur over alleged obscenity in an episode of the “India’s Got Latent” show.

A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh issued the interim order while also notifying the respondents—the Union of India, the State of Maharashtra, and the State of Assam—regarding Allahabadia’s petition challenging multiple FIRs. Additionally, the court directed that no new FIRs should be registered against him based on the controversial episode.

The interim relief comes with the following conditions:

1. Allahabadia must cooperate with the investigation and appear when summoned by investigating officers.
2. He is required to fully participate in the inquiry without legal counsel accompanying him inside police stations.
3. His passport must be submitted to the investigating officer at Thane police station.
4. He cannot leave the country without prior approval from the Supreme Court.
5. Neither he nor his associates are permitted to air any further shows until further orders.

The bench also granted Allahabadia the right to seek police protection in Maharashtra and Assam should he face any threats that could hinder his participation in the investigation.

Despite granting interim relief, the court strongly criticized the language used by Allahabadia in the show. Justice Kant, in particular, called his remarks “dirty” and “perverted” and questioned whether such language could be defended.

“Are you justifying this kind of language?” Justice Kant asked Advocate Dr Abhinav Chandrachud, who represented Allahabadia. Chandrachud acknowledged that he found the language distasteful but argued that the legal question was whether it met the threshold for a criminal offence. He cited the Apoorva Arora case, which held that profanity alone does not necessarily constitute obscenity.

However, Justice Kant appeared unconvinced. “If this does not qualify as obscenity, then what does? Is the judgment in the Apoorva Arora case a free pass to say anything?” he questioned.

When Chandrachud pointed out that Allahabadia was facing multiple FIRs, Justice Kant clarified that, as of that day, only two had been officially registered—one in Mumbai and another in Guwahati. However, Chandrachud argued that a third FIR had been filed in Jaipur and that complaints were surfacing across the country. He referenced the TT Antony case, which states that multiple FIRs cannot be filed for the same offence. Justice Kant responded that the cases involved different statements and issues, making them distinct.

Referring to Allahabadia’s alleged comments about Arunachal Pradesh, Justice Kant remarked, “The obscene language and derogatory remarks directed at individuals from Arunachal Pradesh are the subject of another FIR.”

The judge continued his criticism: “His mind seems to be filled with filth, which he has expressed on this program. He has insulted parents as well. Why should the court extend any favour to him?”

Chandrachud attempted to draw a parallel with the Nupur Sharma case, noting that she had received relief despite making a statement deemed more severe. He also informed the court that Allahabadia was facing death threats. Justice Kant, while condemning such threats, stated that the authorities would handle security concerns. He added, “If someone seeks cheap publicity by making such statements, there will be others who seek publicity by issuing threats.”

Further condemning Allahabadia’s remarks, the judge stated, “The words he used would bring shame to parents, sisters, and daughters. Society as a whole would feel humiliated. It reflects a perverted mindset.”

Chandrachud also mentioned that a colleague who accompanied Allahabadia to the police station was mobbed. Justice Kant criticized the lawyer’s presence, asking, “Under what law did the lawyer go? Just because one can afford legal representation does not mean lawyers should provide such services. This is disrespecting the legal profession.”

Additionally, the court took note of reports that Allahabadia’s mother, a doctor, was being harassed by individuals pretending to be patients. Justice Kant remarked, “What an embarrassment he has caused his parents!”

Justice Kant also noted that the bench was aware of the source from which Allahabadia had copied the objectionable remarks. However, he pointed out that in other societies where such content is aired, certain precautions—such as disclaimers and content warnings—are put in place, which was not done in this case.

In response, Chandrachud clarified that the episode was available only to paid subscribers, all of whom were adults. The controversy arose when a 10-second clip from the 45-minute show was leaked on social media. Ultimately, the court issued notices and requested responses from the involved parties.

The remarks in question were made during an episode of comedian Samay Raina’s YouTube show, “India’s Got Latent.” The episode also featured YouTubers Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija.

After clips from the episode went viral, they sparked outrage, with Allahabadia and Raina facing heavy criticism. Raina later issued a public apology and deleted all episodes of the show from his YouTube channel, while Allahabad also apologized, acknowledging that his comments were inappropriate.

On February 10, Guwahati Police registered an FIR against five YouTubers and content creators, accusing them of “promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit and vulgar discussions.” Reports suggest that similar cases have been filed by the Maharashtra Cyber Department and Jaipur Police.

On February 14, Advocate Chandrachud mentioned the case before Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, who responded that a date had already been set for the matter. When Chandrachud expressed concern over possible coercive action by Assam police, CJI Khanna refrained from making further comments.

Notably, in 2024, Allahabadia received the “Disruptor of the Year” award at the National Creators Award ceremony, presented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

In a related development, YouTuber Ashish Chanchlani has approached the Gauhati High Court, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR filed against him for alleged obscene and controversial remarks made during the same episode of “India’s Got Latent.”