SC Orders Influencers To Apologise For Mocking Disabled

New Delhi: Underscoring that commercial and prohibited speech is not protected under the fundamental right to free expression, the Supreme Court on Monday directed five social media influencers, including India’s Got Latent host Samay Raina, to display unconditional apologies in their podcasts or shows for ridiculing persons with disabilities and rare genetic disorders.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that “the degree of repentance should be higher than the degree of offending” and made it clear that the court may consider imposing penalties on the influencers at a later stage for their offensive remarks.

“It is like purging contempt,” Justice Kant remarked, asking the influencers to indicate how much penalty they were willing to pay, noting that such funds could be used to support treatment for patients suffering from rare genetic disorders like spinal muscular atrophy (SMA).

The five influencers are accused of mocking persons with disabilities, including those affected by SMA and visual impairment. Except for Sonali Thakkar alias Sonali Aditya Desai, the other four, including Raina, were present in court during the hearing.

Justice Bagchi cautioned that influencers must exercise greater care when creating humour relating to communities, particularly vulnerable groups, saying: “Much of this media block is used like feeding your own ego. It feeds on yourself and when you become too big and have so many followers… It’s not only freedom of speech here. It is purely commerce. In fact, in the Amish Devgan case this court classified various kinds of speech like commercial speech and prohibited speech. This overlap is where you have no fundamental rights.”

The bench permitted the ministry of information and broadcasting to intervene and asked Attorney General R. Venkataramani to prepare draft guidelines to regulate social media content, incorporating the views of all stakeholders.

Venkataramani informed the court that the government was already in the process of formulating guidelines, though he ruled out any “gag order.” Justice Kant welcomed this and said the earlier suggestion was to ensure draft guidelines would be placed in the public domain for consultation.

“There should be some accountability. Today it is disabled people, but tomorrow it can be women, children, or senior citizens,” Justice Kant said.

Justice Bagchi added: “Humour is part of life. We laugh at ourselves. But when you start laughing at others, then we should have sensibility. It’s not only about disability; we are a country of varied communities.” He further told the Attorney General that the proposed guidelines should sensitise content creators and assign accountability.

Senior advocate Aprajita Singh, appearing for NGO Cure SMA Foundation of India, which petitioned the court against the influencers, said that the influencers had ultimately tendered unconditional apologies. She added that under the Information Technology Rules and the Cinematograph Act, persons with disabilities cannot be targeted, and urged the court to direct influencers to spread awareness about rare genetic disorders and disabilities.

Justice Kant suggested that penal action should also be considered under the rules, proportionate to the harm caused to the dignity of disabled persons. The bench emphasised that any new social media guidelines should not be a knee-jerk reaction to one incident but framed on broad, inclusive parameters.

The court also pulled up Raina for his affidavit, noting that he initially attempted to defend himself and appear innocent before submitting his apology.

While exempting the influencers from further personal appearances, the bench ordered them to display their apologies prominently on their shows for mocking disabled persons and those with genetic disorders.

Besides Raina, notices had earlier been issued to influencers Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar alias Sonali Aditya Desai, and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar.