Bombay HC Grants Kunal Kamra Protection From Arrest in FIR Over Joke On Eknath Shinde

The Bombay High Court on Friday granted protection from any coercive action, including arrest, to comedian Kunal Kamra in relation to an FIR filed against him for allegedly making an objectionable joke about Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde during a stand-up comedy performance.

The court admitted Kamra's petition to quash the FIR and stated that he "shall not be arrested in respect of the FIR during the pendency of the plea," reported the Indian Express.

Photo Credit: x.com/kunalkamra88

It added, "However, the investigation in this case can continue. If the investigating agency wants to record the petitioner's statement, the same can be recorded in Chennai with the help of local police after giving notice of reasonable period to the petitioner so that he can remain present in Chennai. If during the pendency of this petition the chargesheet is filed, the concerned court (trial court) shall not proceed against the petitioner during pendency of this petition."

Previously, on April 16, the Bombay High Court had granted Kamra interim protection from arrest until a verdict was delivered. Earlier, the Madras High Court had extended similar protection until April 17.

The FIR, originally filed by MIDC police in Mumbai on 24 March based on a complaint from Shiv Sena MLA Murji Patel, accuses Kamra of offences under sections 353(1)(b) and 353(2) (statements conducing to public mischief), along with 356(2) (defamation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The case was later transferred to Khar police as a Zero FIR.

On 16 April, a division bench of Justices Sarang V Kotwal and Shriram M Modak noted that the state had acknowledged a summons was issued under section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), "which specifically refers to the notice where the arrest of a person is not required". The bench added, therefore, that "the question of arresting the applicant in this particular case does not arise."

Senior advocate Navroz Seervai, representing Kamra, argued that none of the charges outlined in the FIR were "ex-facie made out" and therefore sought for the FIR to be quashed. He further requested that a complete stay be placed on the investigation pending the court's decision.

Seervai also contended that the FIR had been lodged "in haste" and without any preliminary inquiry, and described it as a "gross abuse of power" by politically motivated members of the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena. He pointed out that this was evident in the vandalism of the performance venue by individuals allegedly affiliated with political parties after the video of the show had been posted online.

He further submitted that the FIR had been filed with "malafide" intent, highlighting that no legal proceedings were initiated when Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar had allegedly referred to Shinde as a "traitor" in February 2023, nor when former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray had made comments about Shinde during the election campaign.

Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, appearing for the state, opposed the petition, arguing that the FIR was valid as all offences had been disclosed. He emphasised that the investigation was still at a "nascent" stage and that further evidence needed to be gathered "to find out the truth in respect of allegations".

Venegaonkar maintained that Kamra's remarks were not mere "humorous criticism" or "political satire by any stretch of imagination" nor simply an "opinion on the manner in which the state was functioning", but rather "malicious targeting of an individual" in a high public office, aimed at damaging his reputation and dignity.

The High Court also queried the police about the necessity of summoning Kamra to Maharashtra when he had cited "reasonable excuse" due to death threats in the state, and had instead requested to provide his statement via virtual mode. The bench asked why the police could not travel to Tamil Nadu to record the statement.