Popular YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia, the face behind the channel 'BeerBiceps,' and Ranveer Allahbadia Podcast is under investigation by Mumbai police after a claim of uttering obscene remarks during his guest appearance on the YouTube program India's Got Latent. The host of the show, comedian Samay Raina, is also facing legal action over the incident.

Although Mumbai police have not filed a First Information Report (FIR) as yet, Assam police formally complained on February 10, citing reported offenses under Section 296 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The complaint was against Allahbadia and Raina for conducting "obscene acts," prompting a broader discussion regarding regulating content online in India.

What do Indian laws say about obscenity in digital platforms?

Obscenity laws in India have changed over time, especially as digital platforms become more influential. Section 294 of the BNS prohibits the sale, display, or distribution of obscene material, including electronic content. It defines obscenity as material that is "lascivious or appeals to prurient interest" or that "tends to deprave and corrupt persons" exposed to it. 

The criminals are liable for up to two years of imprisonment and a penalty of up to Rs. 5,000 in the case of a first conviction.

Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, of 2000, criminalizes online publication or transmission of obscene content as well. This offense has stricter punishment under it, where a first-time criminal is liable to imprisonment of up to three years and penalties of up to Rs. 5 lakh.

How has India defined obscenity over the years?

India’s obscenity laws were shaped by the 1964 ruling in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra, which considered D.H. Lawrence’s controversial novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover obscene. 

The court relied on the 1868 British Hicklin test, to decide if something was obscene. This test judged content based on whether it could negatively influence or have a tendency to corrupt easily impressionable people.

In 2014, India's Supreme Court leaned towards a more modern approach in Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal. In this ruling, the consideration of content "as a whole" was given more importance rather than concentrating on specific words and sentences. The court also adopted the "community standards test," which evaluates if society, in general, finds content offensive.

Obscenity vs. vulgarity:

In March 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed a case against the creators of the YouTube show College Romance. Some people argued that the show’s use of explicit language made it obscene. However, the judges disagreed. They explained that obscenity is when content is meant to cause sexual arousal, while vulgar language—even if offensive—is not necessarily obscene.

A bench of Justices A.S. Bopanna and P.S. Narasimha explained: "Obscenity relates to material that arouses sexual and lustful thoughts, which is not at all the effect of the abusive language or profanities that have been employed in the episode."

The court also decided that language, though offensive, is not necessarily obscene unless it causes obvious sexual arousal.

This case has the potential to be a major example of interpreting online speech and inappropriate comments in the name of dark humor within India's obscenity laws. Whatever the outcome, it is sure to shape future content control within the country.

Also read: Ranveer Allahbadia’s ‘watch your parents have s**’ question on India’s Got Latent isn’t original