The Supreme Court emphasized the need to strike a balance between morality and freedom of expression while advising the Centre to consider this before formulating guidelines for digital content. This comes in the wake of widespread controversy over YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia’s controversial remarks.

The court has lifted its previous restriction on Allahbadia from producing new content on his podcast, The Ranveer Show, but with a condition. He must submit an undertaking ensuring that his content adheres to acceptable moral standards, making it suitable for all viewers.

Ranveer Allahbadia, widely known as The BeerBiceps Guy, faced intense criticism last month for a remark he made during India’s Got Latent, a roast show hosted by comedian Samay Raina. His controversial question directed at a contestant—posing an inappropriate and offensive dilemma—sparked outrage on social media. Many users accused digital platforms of promoting vulgarity under the guise of comedy, leading to multiple police complaints against Allahbadia, Raina, and others associated with the show.

Following the backlash, Allahbadia issued a public apology, admitting that his comment was inappropriate and not even humorous. In a video statement shared on social media, he expressed regret, saying, "Comedy is not my forte. I shouldn’t have said what I said, and I am sorry." He further assured that he would not misuse his platform and acknowledged a lapse in judgment.

During court proceedings, Allahbadia’s lawyer, Abhinav Chandrachud, requested the bench—comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh—to allow him to resume his show, citing that it employs approximately 280 people.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, differentiated between humor, vulgarity, and perversity. He remarked that Allahbadia’s statement fell into the last category, adding that it was not suitable for general audiences.

Justice Surya Kant observed that while free speech is a fundamental right, it comes with responsibilities and reasonable restrictions. He remarked that digital platforms should not become spaces devoid of accountability, but also cautioned against excessive censorship. The court insisted that any regulatory framework should be formulated with input from various stakeholders, including legal experts and content creators, to ensure fairness.

Criticizing the use of offensive language in the name of entertainment, the court highlighted the presence of comedians who create family-friendly humor without resorting to crude language. “Using offensive language is not a talent,” remarked Justice Kant, referencing a veteran humorist known for clean comedy.

The court directed the Centre to draft regulatory measures that uphold the fundamental right to free speech while maintaining moral boundaries. These proposals will be made public for feedback before any final legislative decision is taken. Stressing the importance of constitutional principles, the bench noted that reasonable restrictions exist to preserve public order and morality, aligning with the vision of the Constitution’s framers.

The Centre has now been tasked with formulating a balanced approach that does not stifle creative expression but ensures digital platforms maintain ethical standards.