Probe against Ranveer Allahbadia complete, says SC; sets Apr 28 to hear plea for passport return
Supreme Court took into note that Maharashtra police has completed the probe into the matter and the chargesheet to be filed soon, news agency ANI said.
The Supreme Court has taken note of the completed probe by Maharashtra police and the upcoming chargesheet.
Supreme Court has asked Assam police to inform it whether investigation regarding Allahabadia is completed and he is no longer required for the purpose of further investigation. Supreme Court posts the case for hearing on April 28.
The Supreme Court observed the probe in relation to podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia was complete and said it would on April 28 hear his plea for the return of his passport in a case of distasteful remarks in a YouTube show, news agency PTI said.
On February 18, the top court protected Allahbadia from arrest in multiple FIRs filed over his comments during a YouTube show and directed him to deposit his passport with the investigating officer of Police Station Nodal Cyber Police, Thane.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said it would consider Allahbadia's plea on April 28.
During the hearing, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for Assam and Maharashtra police, said in the Guwahati FIR, the statement of one co-accused would be recorded whereas investigation was complete in relation to the FIR in Mumbai but a chargesheet was yet to be filed.
The bench recorded Mehta's statement and observed the investigation qua Allahbadia was complete.
The top court on March 3 allowed Allahbadia to resume his podcast "The Ranveer Show" subject to maintaining "morality and decency" and making it suitable for viewers of all ages.
Allahbadia, popularly known as BeerBiceps, was booked for his comments on parents and sex on comic Samay Raina's YouTube show "India's Got Latent".
The apex court had initially restrained Allahbadia from airing any programme of his podcast which had a direct or an indirect bearing on the merits of the sub-judice cases he was involved in.
On February 18, the top court granted interim protection from arrest to Allahbadia while calling his comments "vulgar" and saying he had "dirty mind" which put the society to shame.
Aside from Allahbadia and Raina, others named in the case in Assam are comics Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh and Apoorva Makhija.
First Published: 21 Apr 2025, 04:18 PM IST
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bizman duped of Rs 1.7 cr in fake namkeen venture
1 2 Hyderabad: A businessman from Noorkhan Bazar has alleged that he was duped of nearly 1.7 crore by a fake manufacturer of savouries and snack foods, who lured him into a bogus partnership under the pretext of running a namkeen and paan masala business. Acting on his complaint, Hyderabad central crime station (CCS) police have registered a case of cheating and launched a manhunt for the accused. The complainant, Syed Shah Hamed Hussain Sabri, told police that Abhishek Avula introduced himself as a reputed manufacturer of snack foods, claiming his family owned several popular brands. To support his claims, Abhishek reportedly pointed to YouTube videos and a substantial online following to bolster his credibility. Convinced by these representations, Sabri said he entered into a formal business partnership with Abhishek in Sept 2024. Between Oct 22 and Dec 14, 2024, Sabri transferred 1.21 crore from his HDFC Bank account to Abhishek's firm, and an additional 48.1 lakh to individuals introduced as employees and suppliers. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad "I was told the funds would be used to purchase machinery, raw materials, and to hire staff. But after the transfers were made, Abhishek became untraceable — he switched off his phone and cut off all contact," Sabri said in his complaint. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The World's Oldest Living Actors. Reportingly Undo Suspecting foul-play, Sabri made inquiries and discovered that Abhishek had allegedly cheated several others in a similar fashion under the guise of running namkeen and masala businesses. Multiple FIRs are reportedly pending against him in Hyderabad, Bengaluru, and Chennai. Following Sabri's complaint, CCS police registered a case against Abhishek on July 18 under sections 316(2) (criminal breach of trust) and 318(4) (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. "We have prima facie evidence of Sabri transferring substantial amounts to a company operated by the accused. He is currently absconding, and efforts are on to trace and apprehend him," a CCS official said.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Judge blocks Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions in third ruling since high court decision
A federal judge on Friday (July 25, 2025) blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen States remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to issue nationwide injunctions. The States have argued Mr. Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Lawyers for the government had argued Mr. Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Mr. Sorokin wrote. Mr. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Mr. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Mr. Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Mr. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent on Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday (July 23, 2025), a San Francisco-based appeals court found the President's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. A Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by States. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional. Plaintiffs in the Boston case earlier argued that the principle of birthright citizenship is 'enshrined in the Constitution,' and that Mr. Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a 'flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.' They also argue that Mr. Trump's order halting automatic citizenship for babies born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily would cost States funding they rely on to 'provide essential services' — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to 'early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.' At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Mr. Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Trump Birthright Order Blocked Again in Fresh Legal Setback
President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship was blocked nationwide for the third time in less than a month, the latest sign that a US Supreme Court decision restricting 'universal injunctions' is having little impact on the dispute. The injunctions set up what is likely to be yet another set of appeals that could reach the Supreme Court, which has largely backed Trump in his broad crackdown on immigration. The justices haven't yet taken up the question of whether Trump's birthright citizenship order is constitutional. A federal judge in Boston ruled on Friday that an injunction pausing Trump's order nationwide is the only way to offer full protection to the Democratic-led states the filed the suit. The judge said his actions are in line with the Supreme Court's findings. US Judge Leo Sorokin said in his ruling that he could not narrow his injunction in part because Justice Department lawyers hadn't offered useful details about how such a ruling would work. 'With stakes this high, the court simply cannot adopt the defendants' blasé approach to the details and workability of a more limited injunction,' the judge said. A nationwide injunction protecting all affected babies was granted in a class-action suit in New Hampshire on July 10, while a federal appeals court this week upheld a similar block in a suit brought by four Democratic-led states. The new ruling comes in a suit brought by 18 states. A judge in a separate class-action suit is weighing another potential injunction. The Fight Over Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order: QuickTake Trump's order would restrict citizenship to babies with at least one parent who is a US citizen or green card holder. Critics say it violates a provision of the Constitution that grants citizenship to virtually every baby born in the US. The government says the directive closes a loophole that encourages illegal immigration. Trump's order was initially put on hold nationwide months ago in three separate cases. But the Supreme Court on June 27 paused those orders after ruling that judges generally can't issue nationwide injunctions that block federal policies outright. The justices returned the cases to the lower courts to weigh whether their injunctions needed to be narrowed or amended so that they provide relief only to the people or groups that sued. Sorokin held a hearing on the matter earlier this week. The Supreme Court's opinion, hailed as a major victory by the Trump administration, hasn't stopped judges from finding that broad injunctions against the president's birthright citizenship order are still necessary to protect US-born children of migrants while the cases proceed. In their request to maintain a nationwide injunction, the Democratic-led states said the Supreme Court's finding on so-called universal injunctions 'has no bearing on this case.' The states argue that a nationwide injunction is the only way to prevent harm that they say would be caused by allowing the executive order to take effect in some states, creating a chaotic patchwork of citizenship. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
