Supreme Court refuses to restrict podcasts, reels; cautions against misuse of Article 32
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a petition seeking curbs on podcasts and social media reels, stating that the constitutional remedy under Article 32 cannot be used to politicise issues. A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe heard the plea filed by Mohd. Anas Chaudhary against allegedly derogatory comments about Prophet Muhammed made by influencer Nazia Elahi Khan in a podcast.
The petitioner's counsel argued that communally hurtful content was being circulated online and sought regulation of such material. The Bench, however, advised the petitioner to file a complaint and ensure registration of an FIR, as per standard legal procedure. When the counsel clarified that the petition was not about FIRs but about the need for broader curbs, Justice Narasimha remarked that the issue did not warrant an Article 32 petition.
Justice Aradhe suggested approaching the competent authority under the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009. The Court noted that multiple FIRs had already been registered against the influencer after the podcast clip went viral in June 2026.
Earlier, a Vacation Bench led by Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah had declined urgent hearing, emphasising that complainants must first follow basic legal procedures before approaching the Supreme Court. The Court reiterated that Article 32 is not a tool to bypass established legal remedies.
