Supreme Court notice on Pranit More’s plea to club FIRs in ‘Rs 370 biryani’ row
Source Entity
The Indian Express
The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre, Maharashtra, and Haryana regarding a plea from comedian Pranit More to consolidate multiple identical FIRs. The case stems from a controversy over a 'Rs 370 biryani' comment, with More seeking legal relief while maintaining he has already issued a public apology.
Legal Intervention in the 'Rs 370 Biryani' Controversy
The Supreme Court of India has officially intervened in the ongoing legal challenges faced by stand-up comedian Pranit More. A three-judge bench, presided over by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, has issued a formal notice to the Central government, as well as the state governments of Maharashtra and Haryana. This judicial action follows a petition filed by More, who is seeking to have multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) registered against him in different jurisdictions consolidated into a single proceeding.
The Nature of the Legal Plea
At the core of the petitioner's argument is the claim that the FIRs filed across Maharashtra and Haryana are identical in nature, stemming from the same controversial incident involving a 'Rs 370 biryani' comment. More’s legal counsel has argued before the bench that the multiplicity of proceedings in disparate states creates an undue legal burden and repetitive litigation. By requesting the 'clubbing' of these FIRs, the petitioner is seeking a streamlined legal process that prevents the exhaustion of resources and the potential for conflicting judicial outcomes.
Context of the Controversy and Apology
The controversy erupted following a performance where the comedian made a remark regarding 'Rs 370 biryani.' The immediate backlash led to the registration of criminal complaints. In his defense, More has maintained that he was merely the host of the event in question. Furthermore, his legal team emphasized that he has already issued a public apology, including a submission to the National Commission for Women (NCW), though that institution reportedly did not accept the gesture. Despite the rejection of his apology, More has expressed his willingness to face trial, provided the legal proceedings are conducted in a unified manner.
Broader Implications for Free Speech and Law
This case highlights the recurring friction between creative expression and local legal enforcement in India. The practice of filing multiple FIRs in various states for a single incident often acts as a significant deterrent to public discourse. By taking up this matter, the Supreme Court is addressing the procedural necessity of protecting individuals from being pulled into a web of cross-state litigation for a single act or statement, balancing the rights of the accused with the state's power to maintain order.
Future Trends in Judicial Oversight
Looking ahead, this Supreme Court intervention could set a precedent for how the judiciary handles cross-jurisdictional litigation involving public figures and performers. As courts increasingly see petitions for the consolidation of cases, the outcome of the Pranit More plea will likely clarify the thresholds for when state governments must yield to a centralized legal process. The court's decision will be a significant indicator of how the judiciary intends to manage the balance between regional accountability and the prevention of legal harassment in the digital age.