Supreme Court Fines Samay Raina ₹3 Lakh for Non-Compliance in India’s Got Latent Disability Awareness Case

July 14, 2026 : The Supreme Court on Tuesday imposed a cost of ₹3 lakh on comedian and YouTuber Samay Raina for failing to comply with its earlier directions requiring him to undertake disability awareness programmes in connection with the India’s Got Latent controversy.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions, including Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 83 of 2025 filed by Ranveer Allahbadia and others, along with proceedings initiated on the plea of the Cure SMA Foundation over allegedly insensitive and derogatory remarks about persons with disabilities made during the YouTube show India’s Got Latent.

The Court observed that although Samay Raina had earlier been permitted to resume his professional activities subject to specific conditions, including organising awareness programmes for persons with disabilities and supporting children suffering from Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), the material placed before it failed to establish meaningful compliance.

Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh, appearing for the Cure SMA Foundation, informed the Bench that Raina had neither contacted the Foundation nor meaningfully involved persons with disabilities in any awareness initiatives. She argued that merely inviting persons with disabilities to attend events could not be treated as compliance with the Court’s directions. She further submitted that the Foundation no longer wished to associate with the comedian because of his conduct.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta supported the submissions and questioned the manner in which compliance was being projected before the Court. He argued that public figures with significant influence have a corresponding responsibility towards society and cannot ignore judicial directions.

After examining the record, the Bench found that no compliance affidavit had been filed despite submissions suggesting otherwise. The Court held that Samay Raina had violated the assurances previously given to the Court and had attempted to mislead it regarding compliance.

Describing the conduct as a serious disregard for the authority of the Court and the sanctity of judicial proceedings, the Bench imposed costs of ₹3 lakh, directing Raina to deposit the amount within two weeks.

During the hearing, Raina’s counsel submitted that persons with disabilities had been invited to certain programmes and photographs had been placed on record. However, he admitted that the Cure SMA Foundation had not been contacted and described the omission as unfortunate. He assured the Court that corrective measures would be taken.

The Supreme Court remained dissatisfied with the explanation, observing that repeated opportunities had already been granted without meaningful compliance. The Bench reiterated that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution carries corresponding duties and responsibilities, particularly for individuals enjoying substantial public influence.

The Court also emphasised that persons with disabilities and individuals suffering from rare genetic disorders are entitled to dignity, equality and constitutional protection. It stressed the need for greater public sensitivity towards vulnerable sections of society and recalled its earlier observations urging the Union Government to strengthen the legal framework dealing with derogatory remarks against persons with disabilities.

During the proceedings, it was also brought to the Court’s notice that approximately ₹9 lakh had been raised through programmes conducted pursuant to its earlier directions. However, the petitioners clarified that their concern was not financial compensation but genuine compliance with the Court’s directions and sustained disability awareness efforts.

The Supreme Court directed Samay Raina to deposit the costs within two weeks, file a compliance affidavit, issue a public apology and continue organising periodic programmes highlighting the achievements and success stories of persons with disabilities to promote awareness and generate financial support for children affected by SMA.

The Bench warned that failure to comply with its directions before the next hearing could result in substantially higher costs and stricter action.