Supreme Court Penalises Samay Raina, Four Others ₹3 Lakh Each for Breaching Undertaking in Disability Remarks Case
The Supreme Court of India has imposed a cost of ₹3 lakh each on stand-up comedian Samay Raina and four other comedians, holding that they failed to honour an undertaking given to the court in proceedings arising from controversial jokes targeting persons with disabilities. The Bench observed that the respondents had effectively “taken the Court for a ride” by not complying with commitments made during the hearing.
The controversy traces back to proceedings initiated over allegedly insensitive remarks made about persons with disabilities during the comedy show India’s Got Latent. During earlier hearings, the comedians had assured the Supreme Court that they would organise a special programme in association with organisations working for persons with disabilities to promote awareness and highlight their achievements as a measure of restitution.
However, when the matter was taken up again, the Court found that the promised programme had not been conducted as undertaken. Expressing strong displeasure, the Bench remarked that undertakings given before the country’s highest court cannot be treated as mere formalities. The judges stressed that litigants are expected to act in good faith and honour assurances made during judicial proceedings.
Besides Samay Raina, the Court imposed the same ₹3 lakh cost on comedians Vipul Goyal, Balraj Ghai, Sonali Thakkar and Nishant Tanwar, observing that all had failed to fulfil the commitments recorded before the Court. The Bench described the conduct as a “brazen violation” of the undertaking and underscored that compliance with court orders is fundamental to maintaining the integrity of the justice system.
The latest order comes against the backdrop of wider legal scrutiny surrounding India’s Got Latent, which has been at the centre of multiple controversies since 2025 over allegedly obscene and offensive content. While the present proceedings specifically concerned remarks affecting persons with disabilities and the breach of undertakings made before the Supreme Court, the Court’s order signals that it will enforce accountability where parties fail to comply with assurances given in judicial proceedings.
The ruling serves as a reminder that the Supreme Court regards undertakings as binding commitments rather than voluntary promises. By imposing monetary costs and censuring the respondents’ conduct, the Court reinforced that public figures, particularly those with significant influence, are expected to adhere strictly to directions and assurances given before the judiciary.
