Mumbai:
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday reserved its order on comedian Kunal Kamra’s petition seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him for allegedly making defamatory remarks against Maharashtra deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, and granted him interim protection from arrest.
A division bench of Justices S Kotwal and S Modak, after hearing arguments from both sides, reserved its order. It directed the Mumbai police not to arrest Mr Kamra till the order is passed in the matter.
A First Information Report has been registered at Khar police station here against the stand-up comedian for allegedly calling Shinde “gaddar” (traitor) during a show in the metropolis. Workers of Shinde’s party, Shiv Sena, also vandalised the studio where the show had been recorded.
Mr Kamra’s lawyer Navroz Seervai pointed out that opposition leaders hurled the traitor slur at Eknath Shinde during the 2024 Maharashtra assembly polls campaign, but no action was taken.
But the comedian has been terrorised and victimised, and in the process a stern message has been sent to artistes, through the police, that “if we don’t like it, this is what we will do to you”, he said.
During the show, Mr Kamra sang a parody version of a song from the film “Dil To Pagal Hai” which used the word “gaddar”. He then went on to joke about how Shinde rebelled against Uddhav Thackeray and split the Shiv Sena in 2022.
Mr Seervai submitted that in the past, NCP leader Ajit Pawar, now deputy chief minister, had commented that `it’s time to teach a lesson to the traitor who halts the good work of the government’. But no complaint was filed, the lawyer added.
Ajit Pawar was then part of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government, consisting of the undivided Shiv Sena, NCP and Congress, before Shinde broke away and joined hands with the BJP.
Mr Seervai further highlighted that the opposition’s entire campaign during the 2024 assembly elections was fought on this issue, with a booklet tilted “Panchanama (inspection report) of the traitor Eknath Shinde government” being released.
He also cited a statement of Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Uddhav Thackeray who said it was not just him who faced betrayal by the “traitor”, a reference to Shinde, “but the entire Maharashtra has faced betrayal.” “This is dead serious politics at its most intense, not comedy or satire….but no action has been taken against them,” the lawyer submitted.
He argued that Mr Kamra, as part of his show, expressed personal views on the political upheaval in Maharashtra that led to a split in Shiv Sena.
But even his elderly parents were harassed, advocate Mr Seervai claimed, referring to the police serving a summons at the residence of Mr Kamra’s parents in Mumbai.
“I won’t be exaggerating if I say it’s almost unprecedented….you called people who attended the show for investigation, this shows it is completely malafide,” he submitted.
No offence was made out against Mr Kamra, the lawyer argued, while also citing threats from several politicians as the reason he did not appear before the police in Mumbai.
Public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar opposed the plea, contending that the comedian’s act was not “humorous criticism” of a government, but “malicious targeting of an individual” whose reputation was lowered in society.
“It’s not just about the `gaddar’ comment, but (talking about) someone’s past and (claiming he is) sitting in someone’s lap. There is no humour in the song, it’s single targeting of an individual….where is the criticism of Shinde as deputy CM or deputy chief minister or his work,” he argued.
Mr Venegaonkar further submitted that just because nobody came forward to file a complaint when certain words were spoken in the past, it does not mean you cannot ever be prosecuted for using such words.
Responding to the court’s query as to why the police needed to record Mr Kamra’s statement, the prosecution said probe was required to collect evidence in support of the allegation made in the FIR.
On the threat to the comedian if he came to Mumbai, Mr Venegaonkar submitted that protecting every individual is the duty of the state.
“Let him come forward and say (that he is facing a threat)….we will provide security, if needed,” the prosecution said.
The High Court reserved its order without specifying when it would be passed.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
