Bombay High Court grants comedian Kunal Kamra protection from arrest, allows probe to continue
New Delhi, Apr 25: The Bombay High Court on Friday granted stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra protection from arrest in connection with a first information report (FIR) lodged over his use of the word gaddar (traitor) to describe Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. The FIR was filed by the Mumbai Police following a complaint from Shiv Sena legislator Muraji Patel as reported by Bar & Bench.
A bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and SM Modak, while refusing to stay the police investigation, ruled that any questioning of Kamra must take place in Chennai, where the comedian currently resides. The court also directed that should a chargesheet be filed during the pendency of Kamra’s petition to quash the FIR, the trial court must not proceed with the case until the High Court has delivered its verdict. The Court had earlier granted Kamra interim protection from arrest on April 16. That protection has now been made permanent.
The FIR, registered at Mumbai’s Khar Police Station, stems from Kamra’s stand-up show Naya Bharat, in which he allegedly labelled Shinde a traitor—a remark understood to reference Shinde’s 2022 political defection that split the Shiv Sena and led to the formation of a new BJP-backed coalition government in Maharashtra, report Bar & Bench. Kamra has been booked under Sections 353(1)(b), 353(2), and 356(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Prior to approaching the Bombay High Court, he had secured interim anticipatory bail from the Madras High Court.
Representing Kamra, senior advocate Navroz Seervai argued that the FIR was registered with “undue haste” and lacked a proper preliminary inquiry. “It was filed just over an hour after the police received information, indicative of non-application of mind,” he told the court. He contended that the act of filing a criminal defamation FIR itself was flawed, as defamation is a non-cognizable offence and must be pursued via a private complaint.
Seervai also emphasised that political leaders, including Ajit Pawar and Uddhav Thackeray, had made similar remarks without facing legal repercussions. He asserted that Kamra’s performance was clearly satirical and fell within the bounds of constitutionally protected free speech. “You may not like it. You will be criticised. One judgment says politicians should have thick skin. It can’t be used to crush freedom of speech,” he argued. Raising concerns for Kamra’s safety, Seervai informed the bench that the comedian had received hundreds of death threats, including threats of physical violence and calls for his execution. Despite this, the police insisted on his physical presence for questioning, prompting the request that any interrogation take place in Chennai.
Seervai further contested the invocation of Section 353 of the BNS, which pertains to actions causing public alarm or enmity between groups. “Political parties are not identifiable communities. They are rivals and don’t need a stand-up comedian to sow enmity,” he said.
Defending the FIR, State Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar argued that Kamra’s remarks were not satire but amounted to a targeted personal attack on a public official. He said a preliminary verification had indeed taken place prior to registration of the FIR and maintained that the FIR was valid owing to the presence of other cognizable offences, despite conceding that defamation alone would not suffice. He also claimed that Kamra’s performance had incited unrest, including vandalism at the studio where the show was recorded and disturbances in Thane district. In response to concerns about Kamra’s safety, Venegaonkar assured the court that protection would be provided if requested. After hearing the arguments, the court had reserved its order but granted Kamra continued protection from arrest.
