Read Time: 12 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on Monday heard a petition filed by YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia seeking the release of his passport, which has been withheld in connection with ongoing investigations in Maharashtra and Assam.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh heard the matter. 

Advocate Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, appearing for Allahbadia, informed the Court that the State authorities were previously directed to apprise the Bench regarding the status of the investigation.

“Every time the petitioner is summoned, he is asked the same set of questions,” submitted Chandrachud, emphasizing that Allahbadia is cooperating fully with the investigation.

The Counsel for the State of Assam informed the bench that four statements had been recorded and one co-accused, Apoorva Makhija, was summoned for the next day. The bench questioned whether the summons had been issued in Maharashtra, to which Advocate Chandrachud clarified that, according to media reports, Maharashtra authorities had claimed the chargesheet was ready and that Allahbadia was guilty.

Justice Kant, however, was quick to observe, “That is to be decided by the court.” The Maharashtra Counsel confirmed that the chargesheet had not yet been filed.

Chandrachud recalled that during the previous hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta had submitted that the investigation would be completed in two weeks. Based on that assurance, Allahbadia had refrained from pressing his plea for the return of his passport, which he argued was essential for his livelihood. “He needs to travel abroad for his podcast interviews, which require multiple meetings with guests,” he submitted.

The Court observed that Allahbadia has been cooperating with the authorities and advised his counsel to carefully review the allegations made by an applicant seeking to implead Allahbadia in a related matter. “Maybe instead of an application, a writ petition might be more effective,” suggested Justice Kant.

Solicitor General Mehta, who joined the proceedings later, was asked by the Bench to clarify the status of investigations in both states.

“Maharashtra says the chargesheet is ready to be filed. What is the status in Assam?” Justice Kant queried.

SG Mehta responded that another co-accused (Apoorva Mukhija) is scheduled to appear in Assam soon and assured the Court that “By the end of this month, the investigation will be complete; if the petitioner continues to cooperate, there should be no problem.”

The Bench directed that the investigation concerning Allahbadia be completed at the earliest so that his application for the release of his passport could be properly considered.

"Mr. Tushar Mehra, learned Solicitor General of India, representing the States of Maharashtra and Assam, states that the investigation in Maharashtra qua the petitioner (#RanveerAllahbadia) is complete and the chargesheet is ready to be filed. As regards the FIR in State of Assam, we are informed that one of the co-accused is summoned for tomorrow. Let ld. SG have instructions that the investigation qua the petitioner (Ranveer Gautam Allahbadia) is complete and is no longer required for the purpose of investigation," the Court ordered. 

“We want to know if any co-accused is not cooperating. Please let us know the names; we will do something,” said Justice Kant.

Posting the matter for the next hearing on Monday, April 28, the Court ordered that interim protection granted to Allahbadia shall continue. 

Previously

It is to be noted that on April 1, the Apex Court had refused to release Ranveer Allahbadia’s passport, observing that the prayer relating to the same would be considered after the completion of the investigation. The Court had also taken a note of the undertaking submitted by Allahbadia, wherein he assured the Court that he would maintain decency in his show and refrain from discussing any matter that is sub judice. 

The Court had also recorded that Allahbadia had filed an affidavit stating he had joined the investigation and fully cooperated with the authorities. Accordingly, the Court had ordered, “Upon inquiry, the Solicitor General (SG) informs that the investigation in the ongoing FIRs is likely to be completed within two weeks. Since the petitioner might be required to join the investigation, his prayer for release of passport/travel abroad will be considered after the investigation is complete.”

Earlier, the Court had allowed Allahbadia to resume his podcast, The Ranveer Show, subject to the condition that he shall adhere to the required standards of morality and decency, ensuring that the content is suitable for viewers of all age groups. The Court reiterated that the conditions imposed upon Allahbadia were modified, keeping in view the fact that the livelihood of around 280 employees depended on the telecast of his podcast. Addressing Allahbadia's second prayer, which pertained to allowing him to travel abroad, the court said that such a request would be considered only after he joins the probe and is no longer required for the investigation.

What is the Controversy?

The controversy erupted when Allahbadia passed obscene remarks during his guest appearance on the YouTube show India's Got Latent, a talent show hosted by comedian Samay Raina.

Following this, a complaint was filed with the Mumbai Commissioner and Maharashtra Women's Commission against Ranveer Allahbadia, Samay Raina, and media influencer Apoorva Makhija for allegedly using abusive language on the show.

Subsequently, Himanta Biswa Sarma, Assam Chief Minister, took to X, popularly known as Twitter, and posted, "Today @GuwahatiPol has registered an FIR against certain Youtubers and social Influencers, namely 1. Shri Ashish Chanchlani 2. Shri Jaspreet Singh 3. Shri Apoorva Makhija 4. Shri Ranveer Allahbadia 5. Shri Samay Raina and others for promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit and vulgar discussion in a show titled ' India's Got Latent'."

He had added that "the Guwahati Crime Branch had registered a case vide Cyber PS case no. 03/2025 under Sections 79, 95, 294, 296 of BNS 2023 read with Section 67 of IT Act, 2000, read with Section 4/7 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 read with Section 4, 6 of ⁠the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986."

Case Title: Ranveer Gautam Allahbadia v. Union of India & Another Connected Matter [W.P.(Crl.) No. 83/2025]