“Rekha Gupta counters Atishi’s broken promise claim”
Former Delhi Chief Minister has accused the newly formed BJP government under Chief Minister Rekha Gupta of reneging on its election promises. The allegations come amid growing tensions between the ruling party and the opposition, with claims that key commitments made during the campaign have not been fulfilled. Gupta, however, has dismissed the accusations, stating that her government is committed to delivering on its promises and that necessary measures are being taken to implement welfare initiatives effectively.
Atishi’s Allegations
In a video statement, Atishi alleged that BJP had promised the women of Delhi that in the first cabinet meeting itself, they would pass the scheme in which women of Delhi would be getting ₹2,500. She claimed that despite taking the oath, the new CM Rekha Gupta and her cabinet ministers failed to fulfill this commitment.
Supreme Court Notice on Ashish Chanchlani’s Plea Against Multiple FIRs Over Obscenity Allegations
The Supreme Court on Friday, February 21, issued notice on YouTuber Ashish Chanchlani’s plea seeking the consolidation of multiple FIRs registered against him for obscenity-related offences.
Chanchlani, a prominent content creator, has approached the top court seeking relief from the FIRs lodged in Guwahati and Mumbai. He has requested that all cases be clubbed together and transferred to Mumbai for further proceedings.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh issued notice to the respondents and ordered the tagging of Chanchlani’s petition with a similar plea filed by co-accused Ranveer Allahabadia.
Background of the Case
The controversy began when an episode of “India’s Got Latent,” featuring YouTube personalities Ashish Chanchlani, Ranveer Allahabadia, Jaspreet Singh, and Apoorva Makhija, went viral on social media. The episode contained remarks that led to public outrage, with many accusing the participants of promoting obscenity and engaging in inappropriate discussions.
Following the backlash, an FIR was registered by the Assam police on February 10 against five YouTubers and content creators, including Chanchlani. The charges invoked various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Information Technology (IT) Act, along with provisions from the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.
The specific sections under which the FIRs were filed include:
- Section 294 BNS – Sale or distribution of obscene material.
- Section 67 of IT Act, 2000 – Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material electronically.
- Sections 4/7 of Cinematograph Act, 1952 – Provisions related to obscene content in films.
- Sections 4/6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 – Restrictions on the depiction of women in an indecent manner.
Legal Proceedings So Far
Initially, Chanchlani approached the Gauhati High Court seeking anticipatory bail concerning the Assam FIR. His primary defense was that the remarks in question were made by guest panelist Ranveer Allahabadia and that he had no role in editing or post-production of the episode. The High Court granted him interim anticipatory bail earlier this week, with the condition that he appears before the Investigating Officer within ten days.
Similarly, Ranveer Allahabadia also apologized publicly, acknowledging that his comments were inappropriate. Despite these actions, legal proceedings against the accused continued, leading to the Supreme Court’s intervention.
Arguments in Favor of Chanchlani
Chanchlani’s legal team argues that since multiple FIRs have been filed in different locations for the same incident, clubbing them together is necessary to prevent harassment and ensure judicial efficiency.
His lawyers contend that:
- The statements in question were not made by Chanchlani himself but by another participant.
- He did not have control over the final content that was uploaded.
- There is a risk of multiple legal battles if each FIR is dealt with separately in different jurisdictions.
- The Supreme Court has, in past cases, allowed the consolidation of similar FIRs in a single jurisdiction to avoid duplication and misuse of legal provisions.
Implications and the Way Forward
The Supreme Court’s decision to issue notice on Chanchlani’s plea indicates a willingness to examine the matter carefully. If the court rules in his favor, the multiple FIRs could be consolidated and transferred to Mumbai, where legal proceedings would continue.
This case also highlights the growing scrutiny on digital content creators and the potential legal consequences of content published online. With social media amplifying controversies rapidly, content creators are increasingly facing legal challenges over their statements, even in casual or comedic settings.
The matter is now set for further hearings, where the Supreme Court will decide on the request for clubbing FIRs and the validity of the obscenity allegations. Meanwhile, legal experts and digital rights activists are closely watching the case, as it could set a precedent for how online content creators are held accountable under Indian law.
Legal Representation:
Chanchlani is being represented by Senior Advocate Ajay Tewari, along with advocates Shubham Kulshreshtha, Apoorv Srivastava, Ashish Lalwani, Satya Rath, Amitabh Tewari, Dilmirig Nayani, and Satvik Bansal. Advocate on Record (AoR) Manju Jetley is also part of the legal team.
As the case unfolds, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for digital content regulation and the responsibilities of influencers and YouTubers in India.