Top News

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana passed the order after taking note of the respondents’ compliance with the court’s earlier directions to organise awareness programmes and raise funds for persons with disabilities.

The court also praised their efforts, describing them as “very bright youngsters” and observing that genuine efforts in a positive direction could produce positive results.

“Once there are genuine efforts, positive results are bound to be there,” the court said.

FIRs against five respondents quashed

Besides Raina, the relief was granted to Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar alias Sonali Aditya Desai, and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar.

The Supreme Court said criminal proceedings against the five respondents were being quashed and proceedings set aside.

However, the court made it clear that the broader issue surrounding potentially insensitive content would continue to be examined.

The bench said it would hear suggestions from persons with disabilities on measures that could help ensure better checks on such content before issuing directions on the larger issue.

What was the India’s Got Latent controversy?

The controversy relates to an episode of India’s Got Latent that was recorded on November 14, 2024, and subsequently broadcast online. Several participants and people associated with the show faced criminal cases following allegations that obscene and insensitive remarks were made during the programme.

The controversy also involved YouTuber and podcast host Ranveer Allahabadia, popularly known as Beer Biceps.

Allahabadia’s plea seeking relief in the cases against him remains pending before the Supreme Court. The court had earlier granted him interim protection from arrest.

SC acknowledges efforts for persons with disabilities

The latest order follows steps taken by the respondents to comply with the court’s directions, including organising programmes aimed at creating awareness about disability- issues and raising funds for persons with disabilities.

The Supreme Court’s remarks indicated that it considered these efforts while deciding to close the criminal proceedings against the five respondents.

At the same time, the court has kept the wider question of responsible content and safeguards against insensitive portrayals of persons with disabilities open for further consideration.