When famous podcaster Ranveer Allahabadia, known to his fans as "Beer Biceps" went on as a guest judge on comedian Samay Raina's YouTube show 'India's Got Latent' ("Show") he certainly could not have expected the backlash that would follow the airing of the episode. The show, well known for its 'holds-no bar' type comedy was introduced by Samay in 2024 and saw instant success amongst his fan base for its comedic take on general talent shows and has overtime garnered more fame with the views on each episode significantly surpassing its preceding one.
On February 8, 2025, when episode 6 (members only) of the show released on YouTube featuring Allahabadia amongst other social media influencers and comedians, the reaction and reception seemed to be great. However, following the airing of the episode, various individuals including activist Rahul Easwar, lawyer Ashish Rai and local BJP leader Nilotpal Mrinal filed a complaint against three of the judges including Ranveer Allahabadia for the nature of the comments made on the show by each of them.
The main remark under attack though appears to be a question phrased by Allahabadia to one of the contestants, where the podcaster was seen asking the contestant if 'he would rather watch his parents have sex for the rest of his life – or join in once and have it stop forever?'. The question, clearly an attempt at humour by Allahabadia, has resulted in severe backlash with an FIR and a formal complaint each being filed by activist's and the National Human Rights Commission respectively against the influencers including Allahabadia.
This article aims to delve into the controversy surrounding the complaints while analysing the repercussion of censoring content alleged to have hurt sentiments v/s freedom of speech in the country.
Legal Trouble
In an FIR filed before the Guwahati Police, Allahabadia and his co-judges, have been accused of promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit discussions in addition to being charged under Section 79 Section 95, Section 294 and Section 296 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, read with Sections 4 and 7 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 read with Section 4 and 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.
Subsequent to the filing of various FIR's and complaints and on being reprimanded by various political figures across the board, Allahabadia issued an apology video, where he was seen taking responsibility for his actions and stating how it was not his intention to use his platform, which is viewed and adored by fans of all age groups – for such purposes.
On February 18, 2025, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N.K. Singh, criticized Allahbadia for his controversial remarks, characterized his comments as "disgusting", "filthy", and "insulting" and noted that the comments made on the episode of the show were offensive to societal values and could potentially disgrace "every parent, daughter, sister, and younger brother." Justice Surya Kant also reprimanded Allahbadia, who was represented by Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud in the matter, stating that that a person, upon gaining popularity, should not behave in a way that allows them to speak freely and disregard societal norms.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court ("Court") granted Allahabadia interim protection against the arrest subject to several conditions and ordered that no new criminal cases be registered against him on the basis of his remarks. The Court however barred the podcaster from participating in shows and also directed him to submit his passport at the Thane police station.
India's Got Offended?
The overall impact of the controversy appears to be putting a target on the entire show – with discussions ensuing on its nature being vulgar with a potential to pollute the mind of the youth by way of crass comedy.
On February 11, 2025, YouTube took down the episode of the show featuring Allahabadia after the government intervened in the matter with Samay Raina later voluntarily taking down all episodes of the show form YouTube. The show is now being called upon by the All India Cine Workers Association to be cancelled on grounds of its 'obscene' content that has allegedly offended the sensibilities of individuals across the country. This however begs the question – are we as a nation so easily offended? Is our threshold for jokes so low that we cannot fathom the thought of influencers making generic statements in context of a 'dark comedy' show? The answer as on date – sounds like a resounding yes.
Censorship Vs. Freedom Of Speech
Keeping the view of the majority offended by Allahabadia's comments at the centre of the discussion, it is pertinent to understand why they seem so offended. Claims range from 'the potential of the show corrupting the youth' to 'outright objectification of women'. While on their own both these concerns are objectively justified – when put in the present context of the remarks – both ends of the spectrum appear far-fetched and vague. It is no doubt essential to treat the power of being able to 'influence' millions – with great care and responsibility, however, who decides if that responsibility has been met and what are the rules when the very nature of your job depends on your ability to exercise your right of freedom of speech and expression?
The arguably larger concern here though is one of protection of this right of freedom of speech and expression. The show has had a clear nature and voice since its inception – i.e. one of 'dark humor' Therefore to play the devil's advocate – If we consider that not everyone is into such humor and that there is no compulsion on anyone to watch such content – we come to the potential conclusion that this may not be about protecting the youth or women but may be more power centric from the perspective of censoring content based on opinions. Artist's and more specifically comedians are being targeted by a 'censor squad' in what appears to be a cancel culture trend; and the real questions that comes up are: 'when does it stop becoming acceptable to call for banning of 'artistic expression' on grounds of sensitivity?' and 'What checks and balances are in place to protect an individual's right to freedom of speech and expression?' because let's face it any joke in the right context would offend someone somewhere – but does that mean we create a fear to speak?
Were the comments and remarks made on the show obscene? Maybe. But do they warrant cancelling of the show when its very nature is 'dark humor' – that is question best left for the audience to ponder over. But what is clear at this stage is that the way this controversy unfolds will determine how the entertainment sector in general and comedic acts in particular develop in this country in the coming decades.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
