## Colophon tags:: url:: https://www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/ %% title:: Ranveer Allahbadia Ban: What It Means for Free Speech in India type:: [[clipped-note]] author:: [[@medianama.com]] %% ## Notes > In Defence of Offence: On the Ranveer Allahbadia Controversy — [view in context](https://hyp.is/RxVpvPAjEe-dnT8zPuYpSA/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) ⬆️ date:: [[2025-02-21]] <br> > Additionally, no democracy should accept a system where authorities require someone to prove their future speech won’t be offensive before allowing them to speak. Apart from that, Ranveer Allahbadia’s business is podcasting, and the Supreme Court’s gag order effectively also restricts his fundamental right to carry on his business. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/a4BKJPAjEe-Vvm-oH2B1Iw/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) ⬆️ On "censorship of future speech" <br>> The police have summoned “at least 50 people”, according to reports. Over a joke. How is this okay? The problem isn’t just this one case—it’s the chilling effect it creates. The AIB Roast led to fewer boundary-pushing comedy specials. The Tanmay Bhat controversy about parodying Sachin Tendulkar and Lata Mangeshkar made creators hesitant to parody public figures. Every time a case like this happens, it pushes digital content creators toward self-censorship. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/daDhivAjEe-A3JNe82okgg/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) > 10. Can’t expect platforms to protect speech India has a history of theatre owners shutting down screenings of films due to threats of vandalism and threats by political actors. They’re probably not getting vandalised anymore – or at least not as much – because Bollywood has become insipid in order to avoid any such risks. That’s a chilling effect on speech. Now this focus has shifted to stand-up comedians, who have had to cancel shows because of being denied police permission, or, as recently as last month, cancel shows because of political threats. They’ve received death threats, the police have filed cases against them, and some are being arrested for satire. This kind of harassment has been normalised, and with impunity.  The police are supposed to protect free speech, not prevent it — [view in context](https://hyp.is/geab4vAjEe-F9W8qod-DFA/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) > Just like we can’t expect theaters to protect films, or comedy clubs to protect comedians, we can’t expect platforms to protect content either. YouTube has removed the video, it appears because of a legal request, and it has probably in case of countless other government requests that are afforded secrecy. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/6KUBAvAjEe-Zbp84BvPXgQ/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) ⬆️ It is not clear to me that this 'legal request' was under 69A / blocking rules, and not some part of the 79/IT Rules. 3(1)(d) does list ["decency or morality"](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/45988656/) <br>> We’re a country where everything you say will offend at least someone, somewhere. We need our laws to protect free speech, not restrict it. What also we need to do, is challenge the laws and the rules that lead to this kind of censorship. The mob shouldn’t win. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/kIDHWPAkEe-OCweXc4YSYA/www.medianama.com/2025/02/223-in-defence-of-offence-on-the-ranveer-allahbadia-controversy/) ⬆️ As Mitali Saran [said](https://m.rediff.com/news/column/time-to-rename-india/20180303.htm) "It wants to be seen as strong but it has many sentiments, and they all hurt." <br>