Supreme Court rejects plea to curb reels, podcasts; warns against politicising Article 32
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (July 15, 2026) refused to entertain a writ petition to curb podcasts and social media reels, saying the freedom allowed
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (July 15, 2026) refused to entertain a writ petition to curb podcasts and social media reels, saying the freedom allowed to citizens to directly approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of their fundamental rights cannot be used as a ruse to politicise issues. A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe was hearing a petition filed by Mohd. Anas Chaudhary against the online circulation of allegedly derogatory comments posted by an influencer against Prophet Muhammed.
The counsel for the petitioner highlighted the need to regulate content on social media. He said communally hurtful comments were being made online. The Bench said the petitioner should ideally file a complaint and ensure the registration of FIR in such cases. The lawyer responded that the petition was not about registration of FIRs, but was highlighting the need for curbs against abusive or hurtful social media posts. “Pan-India, people are making these podcasts and reels,” he submitted. Justice Narasimha said the issue raised was not a case for an Article 32 petition, and advised the counsel to take action permissible under the specific laws.
Justice Aradhe suggested the petitioner may approach the competent authority under the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules of 2009 with his grievances. An oral mentioning was made in the Supreme Court during the summer vacation, in early July, about these comments made by influencer Nazia Elahi Khan against the Prophet Muhammed during a podcast in June. The clip had gone viral on social media. The incident had been followed by the registration of multiple FIRs against the influencer. At the time, a Vacation Bench headed by Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah had declined to “short-circuit” standard legal procedures and hear the plea on an urgent basis.
The Court had emphasised the need to first follow the basic procedure of filing a complaint, followed by an investigation into the allegations. The Vacation Bench had made it clear that complainants cannot rush to the Supreme Court as the first port of call.
The BriefWire