The 370 Rupees Biryani Controversy Reaches Supreme Court
Stand-up comedian Praneet More has officially knocked on the doors of the Supreme Court seeking legal relief in connection with a viral video controversy. The case stems from a comment made during a live comedy show regarding a 370 rupees chicken biryani, which subsequently triggered widespread public outrage and multiple police complaints across different states.
More has filed a petition in the apex court specifically requesting the clubbing of FIRs registered against him in Maharashtra and Haryana. Facing multiple criminal proceedings for the same underlying incident in different jurisdictions, the comedian's legal team approached the highest court of the land to streamline the legal process.
How the Controversy Unfolded in Gurugram
The entire episode originated during a comedy show in Gurugram where More was interacting with the audience. An audience member, Himanshu Jangra, came up on stage and spoke about a date where he spent 370 rupees on chicken biryani, expressing expectations of physical intimacy in return. Comedian Praneet More laughed and termed it 'peak Gurugram content'.
While the comment was initially made in a live setting, the upload of the video on social media platforms sparked immediate backlash. Netizens accused the participants of trivializing the critical issue of consent and spreading inappropriate content, leading to a massive online outcry.
Public Backlash and Legal Action
Following intense criticism on social media, Praneet More issued a public apology. However, the apology was not enough to halt legal consequences. Maharashtra Cyber Police took suo motu cognizance and registered a case against More, Jangra, and others for transmitting obscene and offensive online material.
Subsequently, based on a complaint filed by the National Commission for Women (NCW), another FIR was registered against the comedian in Gurugram, Haryana. This created a complex scenario where More faced separate criminal investigations and proceedings in multiple states for the same video.
Arguments Presented in the Supreme Court
During the hearing before the bench led by the Chief Justice, More's counsel argued that the controversial video was uploaded by his PR team without his explicit permission. The lawyer stated that while the comedian is fully prepared to face trial and cooperate with the legal process, the multiple FIRs across different states should be clubbed together.
After hearing the preliminary submissions, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Central government, as well as the governments of Maharashtra and Haryana, seeking their responses on the petition.
