On April 16, 2025, the Bombay High Court granted interim protection from arrest to stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra in connection with an FIR lodged against him over his alleged use of the term “gaddar” (traitor) in reference to Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. A division bench comprising Justices Sarang Kotwal and SM Modak heard Kamra’s petition seeking the quashing of the FIR, which was registered by the Mumbai Police on the basis of a complaint filed by Shiv Sena MLA Muraji Patel.
Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, appearing for Kamra, argued that none of the offences mentioned in the FIR were made out and asserted that the criminal justice process was being weaponised to harass and intimidate the comedian for his political satire. The FIR, he submitted, was registered merely 70 minutes after the complaint was lodged—without a preliminary inquiry as mandated under Section 173 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and thus amounted to a procedural violation.
The bench took note of the submissions and concluded arguments on the matter. The Court reserved its order but made it clear that Kamra shall not be arrested in the meantime. This interim relief came in the backdrop of the prosecution’s concession that the summons issued to Kamra was under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, which explicitly provides that arrest is not required in such cases. “In that background, the question of arresting the petitioner does not arise,” the Court noted, as per LiveLaw.
Kamra’s plea also drew attention to the police’s insistence on his physical presence for questioning in Mumbai, despite credible death threats against him. The comedian, who resides in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu, had initially approached the Madras High Court for anticipatory bail, which was granted till April 17. He later moved the Bombay High Court seeking to quash the FIR entirely. His petition further alleged that over 500 threats had been received via email and messages following his performance of a parody song during his recent stand-up act titled “Naya Bharat”, which reportedly included the term “gaddar” in reference to Eknath Shinde’s political defection from Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena to the BJP-led alliance.
The FIR was registered under Sections 353 (1) (b), 353 (2), and 356 (2) of the BNSS, which pertain to speech that allegedly incites or disrupts public order. Kamra, however, maintained that his comments were well within the bounds of artistic and political expression protected by Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. He contended that the case against him was a misuse of state machinery to suppress dissent and artistic freedom.
The Court’s interim relief underscores a critical adjudication on free speech, misuse of criminal law, and procedural safeguards intersect. The outcome of the case is likely to set an important precedent on the extent to which political satire can be legally challenged in contemporary India.
Related:
SC: Recent judgment in the Imran Pratapgarhi case, what are police powers under section 173 (3) BNS?
When Courts Fail Survivors: How patriarchy shapes justice in sexual offence against women cases
Torn Pages, Broken Bones – The Violent Suppression of Teachers’ Voices