Supreme Court Says Samay Raina ‘Took Court for a Ride’, Imposes ₹3 Lakh Cost in India’s Got Latent Case
The Supreme Court has imposed a ₹3 lakh cost on comedian Samay Raina, observing that he had “taken the Court for a ride” by failing to honour an undertaking given during proceedings arising out of the India’s Got Latent controversy. Four other comedians—Vipul Goyal, Balraj Ghai, Sonali Thakkar and Nishant Tanwar—were also directed to pay the same amount after the Court found that they had similarly failed to comply with their assurances.
The case relates to controversial jokes about persons with disabilities made during episodes of India’s Got Latent. During earlier hearings, the comedians had assured the Supreme Court that they would organise a special public programme in association with organisations working for persons with disabilities to promote awareness, celebrate their achievements and help address the hurt caused by the remarks. The undertaking was recorded by the Court as part of the proceedings.
When the matter was heard again, the Bench found that the promised programme had not been organised despite the passage of considerable time. Expressing strong displeasure, the Court remarked that the respondents had failed to honour a solemn undertaking given before the country’s highest court, observing that they had effectively “taken the Court for a ride.” The Bench warned that judicial undertakings are binding commitments and cannot be treated as empty promises or litigation tactics.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court also cautioned that failure to comply with its directions could invite more stringent consequences. The Bench reportedly remarked that if the respondents did not deposit the imposed cost, “one more zero can be added,” signalling that continued non-compliance would be viewed seriously.
The Court’s order does not amount to a conviction on the underlying controversy surrounding the comedy show. Instead, the penalty stems from the Court’s finding that the respondents breached an undertaking voluntarily given during the proceedings. The Supreme Court emphasised that parties appearing before constitutional courts must act in good faith and scrupulously comply with assurances made on the judicial record.
The ruling reinforces a long-standing legal principle that undertakings given to a court carry the force of a binding obligation. By imposing costs and censuring the comedians’ conduct, the Supreme Court underscored that public figures, like all litigants, are expected to respect judicial directions and cannot avoid accountability after securing relief on the basis of assurances made before the Court.
