Bombay HC Seeks State Reply on Kunal Kamra FIR Quash Plea

Bombay HC Seeks State Reply on Kunal Kamra FIR Quash Plea
X

Bombay HC Seeks State Reply on Kunal Kamra FIR Quash Plea

Bombay High Court asks Maharashtra to respond to Kunal Kamra’s plea seeking FIR quash over satirical video targeting Deputy CM Eknath Shinde.

The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Maharashtra Government to present its stance on stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra’s plea seeking dismissal of the FIR filed against him by Mumbai's Khar Police.

The case concerns a satirical video in which Kamra allegedly referred to Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde using the term "gaddar" (traitor), sparking controversy and resulting in criminal charges.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Sarang Kotwal and S.M. Modak issued formal notice to the State and complainants and scheduled a detailed hearing for April 16 at 2:30 p.m.

Senior advocate Navroz Seervai, representing Kamra, told the court that although the Madras High Court had extended interim relief to Kamra until April 17, the focus of their plea remained the annulment of the FIR. "It would be irresponsible for me to go on without that being addressed," Seervai said.

Seervai argued that despite Kamra's repeated offers to provide his statement via video conferencing due to security concerns, the authorities have insisted on his physical attendance. “We’ve proposed cooperation through virtual means on at least three separate occasions. This isn’t a violent crime; the content is a publicly available comedy video,” he said.

The defense emphasized that Kamra has received threats, and the insistence on his physical presence amid safety concerns should be reconsidered until the petition is decided.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mankunwar Deshmukh, appearing for the State, requested the matter be postponed to April 22. However, the Bench declined, stating the interim protection lapses on April 17 and that the issue would be heard earlier, on April 16.

At the upcoming hearing, the court is expected to address whether Kamra must appear in person for proceedings related to the case.

Next Story
Share it