The Bombay High Court on April 25, 2025, directed the Mumbai Police not to arrest comedian Kunal Kamra in connection with the FIR registered against him for allegedly calling Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde a "gaddar" (traitor) in a satirical video. However, the Court permitted the police to proceed with their investigation.
A division bench comprising Justices Sarang Kotwal and Shriram Modak stated that the Mumbai Police may travel to Chennai, near Kamra’s residence in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu, and seek the assistance of the local police to record his statement.
If during the pendency of this petition the chargesheet is filed, the concerned court should not take cognizance of it, the bench further added.
The judgment was reserved on April 16, 2025, during which the Court had already granted interim protection from arrest to Kamra. The bench had noted that the summons issued to Kamra under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) did not mandate his arrest.
Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, appearing for Kamra, argued that the comedian's video falls within the constitutional protection of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). He maintained that the FIR represents an abuse of state power to target a performing artist.
"This is fundamentally a case of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of an artist who happens to be a satirist and stand-up comedian. Taking everything on face value, it does not come under the offence alleged," submitted Seervai.
Seervai also cited the Supreme Court's ruling in Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat (2025 LiveLaw (SC) 362), which emphasized the need to safeguard individuals expressing unpopular opinions, particularly when they fall under the scope of artistic freedom.
He noted that the FIR was filed in haste, under Section 356(2) of the BNSS concerning defamation, even though the individual allegedly defamed, Eknath Shinde, did not lodge the complaint. Seervai stressed that the police failed to apply their mind before registering the case.
In his arguments, Seervai told the Court that Kamra has been receiving death threats from members of the Shiv Sena. Despite this, the police insisted on his personal presence during the investigation. He said that Kamra's video was not intended to incite fear or public disorder but simply expressed his views on the Shiv Sena’s internal political developments.
Read Also:-Bombay High Court Clarifies: Only Triple Talaq Banned, Talaq-e-Ahsan Still Valid Under Law
To victimise and almost terrorise a person so that they are hobbled in the exercise of free speech is yet another case of the rarest of rare, as mentioned in the Bhajan Singh judgment by the Supreme Court, he argued.
He also pointed out that several politicians, including Deputy CM Ajit Pawar and Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Uddhav Thackeray, have publicly used the term "traitor" for Eknath Shinde. Yet, no action was taken against them.
"But a comedian is to be crushed, harassed, terrorised, victimised and a signal sent out to all artists — that 'you better watch out, if we don't like it, this is what we will do to you through the police'," Seervai told the Court.
He explained that Kamra’s show, ‘Naya Bharat,’ explores various political and social issues, such as the intolerance of the political class toward satire, wealth inequality, and patriarchal expectations imposed on women.
Representing the State, Chief Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar countered Seervai's arguments. He claimed that Kamra’s performance was not satirical but amounted to "malicious targeting" of an individual and therefore did not fall under the protections of Article 19.
"When a stand-up comedian puts up a piece, their criticism should fall within the tenor of humorous commentary. But when it targets an individual, it becomes malicious," Venegaonkar told the Court.
He argued that freedom of speech under Article 19 cannot be used to damage another individual's dignity.
"The petitioner cannot say that he has dignity, rights, and reputation, while a public figure has none. The statements made about Shinde aimed to lower his dignity in society. Article 21, which guarantees the right to a dignified life, applies to the public figure too. He has a family and cannot be humiliated based on his appearance or reputation," the prosecutor said.
Regarding the threats Kamra has received, the prosecutor stated that the State has a duty to ensure everyone’s safety, including the petitioner.
Background of the Case:
Kunal Kamra, who currently resides in Tamil Nadu, was earlier granted interim anticipatory bail by the Court in relation to the FIR filed by Mumbai Police. His interim protection from arrest was initially valid until April 7, then extended until April 17.
A Zero FIR had been registered under Sections 353(1)(b), 353(2) [public mischief], and 356(2) [defamation] of the BNSS by Shiv Sena MLA Muraji Patel. The FIR was later transferred to Khar Police Station in Mumbai. Although Kamra did not explicitly mention Eknath Shinde in his performance, Shiv Sena members interpreted his comments as referring to the Deputy Chief Minister and labeled him a "traitor."
In response, a group of Shiv Sena workers vandalised the Habitat studio in Mumbai, where Kamra had performed. Twelve individuals were arrested in connection with the incident and subsequently granted bail. Kamra has claimed that he has been facing multiple death threats since the show.
With the High Court's order in place, Kamra will not face arrest, but the investigation by Mumbai Police is allowed to proceed under judicial supervision.
