The Supreme Court criticised comedian Samay Raina and influencers Ranveer Allahbadia and Ashish Chanchlani, calling them “self-styled youth icons” while hearing a case concerning remarks made about persons with disabilities. The court observed that Samay Raina had failed to comply with its earlier directions. Moreover, it accused him of taking the court “for a ride.”
What Did The Supreme Court Say?
A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana strongly criticised the influencers for their conduct. The bench remarked that individuals with significant influence among young audiences must act responsibly. In addition, it expressed concern over the impact of their statements on vulnerable communities.
The court stated that Samay Raina was in “brazen violation” of the undertakings previously given before the court and said there was no reason to doubt that he had taken the court “for a ride.”
You might also like: Why Did The Supreme Court Direct Samay Raina To Pay ₹3 Lakh?
Why Is Samay Raina Being Criticised By The Court?
The criticism stems from Samay Raina’s alleged non-compliance with an undertaking submitted before the Supreme Court in connection with proceedings relating to controversial remarks about persons with disabilities.
The court observed that despite claims that a compliance affidavit had been filed, no such affidavit had been submitted. It further noted that attempting to compound the misconduct by making incorrect submissions before the court reflected arrogance and disregard for judicial directions.
What Did The Court Say About The Compliance Affidavit?
During the hearing, the Supreme Court pointed out that it had been informed a compliance affidavit was filed a day earlier. However, upon verification, the bench found that no affidavit had actually been submitted.
The judges remarked that if such conduct did not amount to arrogance, “then we have to change the Oxford dictionary also,” signalling their strong displeasure over the alleged misrepresentation.
Why Were Ranveer Allahbadia And Ashish Chanchlani Mentioned?
Ranveer Allahbadia and Ashish Chanchlani were referred to by the bench while discussing the responsibilities of social media influencers who enjoy substantial popularity among India’s youth. The court described them as “self-styled youth icons.” Furthermore, it emphasised that public figures cannot evade accountability when their content or statements affect public discourse and social sensitivities.
What Is The Case Related To?
The proceedings are linked to remarks concerning persons with disabilities that attracted legal scrutiny earlier this year. The Supreme Court has repeatedly highlighted the need to uphold the dignity and rights of persons with disabilities. In addition, it has stressed that influential creators must exercise greater responsibility while addressing sensitive issues.
The court also reiterated the necessity of strengthening legal safeguards that protect the dignity and interests of persons with disabilities.
Why Has The Case Generated Public Attention?
The case has gained widespread attention because it involves some of India’s most recognisable digital creators. The Supreme Court’s observations have reignited conversations around influencer accountability and the legal consequences of online speech. Additionally, its remarks have prompted talk about the responsibilities that come with having millions of followers across digital platforms.
The court’s sharp remarks have also underscored that celebrity status or online popularity does not exempt individuals from complying with judicial directions.