Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Prevent Circulation Of Influencer's Videos Against Prophet Mohammed

The Supreme Court today(July 15) dismissed a writ petition seeking directions to prevent the circulation of objectionable comments allegedly made by an influencer against Prophet Muhammad.

Rejecting the plea, a bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe orally said that the purpose of filing such petitions seemed to be to sensationalise the matter. 

At the outset, the counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Rajat Kumar, submitted: "This is about certain remarks made in a podcast hurting a particular religious community. What we are currently seeking essentially is that there is no censorship on social media. Constitutional silence is there. This Court has to determine it at some stage. Pan-India people are making podcasts and reels."

In response, Justice Narasimha orally stated that this is not a case in which Article 32 jurisdiction can be invoked. He said: "We understand. These Article 32 petitions are to serve something else."

Justice Aradhe asked the counsel if he was not aware of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009.

Reportedly, influencer Nazia Elahi Khan made alleged derogatory comments against Prophet Muhammad and his family during a podcast in June, clips of which went viral on social media. The incident was followed by multiple FIRs being registered against the influencer.

The PIL impleads the Union of India's Department of Home, MeiTY, YouTube, Facebook, X and Nazia Elahi Khan. It has been filed seeking, inter alia, the following reliefs -

1. Directions for framing and implementation of appropriate guidelines/regulations to curb, regulate and prevent the publication, circulation and dissemination of content on digital and social media platforms that is deliberately derogatory, offensive, or insulting towards revered religious figures, including but not limited to Prophet Muhammad and Bhagwan Shri Ram only,

2. Directions for the authorities to take necessary steps to ensure that adequate safeguards are put in place to prevent the intentional misuse of online platforms for the purpose of outraging religious sentiments and promoting disharmony between communities, and

3. Directions for authorities to take immediate steps for identification, removal and deletion of all defamatory videos and all posts/publications/allegations emanating from them, or any other videos/posts/publications/allegations which are identical to, or similar in content, from all social media platforms, including but not limited to YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and X, to ensure that no untoward incident takes place due to the wide circulation of such videos.

Earlier, the Court refused to list the petition for urgent hearing, observing that the petitioner ought to follow the regular criminal remedies.

Case Details: MD ANAS CHAUDHARY Vs UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA DEPARTMENT OF HOME PRINCIPAL SECRETARY | W.P.(Crl.) No. 255/2026