MP High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Action Against Comedian Kapil Sharma Over Controversial Depiction Of Court Scene

Stating that police have nothing to do with the type of allegations involved, Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to interfere with the lower court orders that disallowed police investigation in a criminal complaint filed against comedian Kapil Sharma.

In 2021, a lawyer named Suresh Dhakad preferred a complaint under Section 190-200 of Cr.P.C. against Kapil Sharma, the anchor of 'The Kapil Sharma Show', and N.P Singh, C.E.O of Sony Television Channel over which the contentious programme was aired.

While considering the application filed by Dhakad against Shivpuri J.M.F.C's order dated 19.04.2023 and Shivpuri 5^th Additional Session Judge's dismissal of criminal revision dated 06.12.2023, the single judge bench of Justice Anand Pathak noted as below:

“….. It appears that petitioner is aggrieved by the way court has been depicted in the television show. Therefore, prime source is recording of programme. Police has little role to play and if learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Shivpuri has declined to entertain the application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. then it has not caused any illegality, perversity or impropriety…”

The bench sitting at Gwalior felt that the complainant will have to 'stand on his own legs' and collect necessary evidence, and depose satisfactorily before the trial court to justify his complaint.

“… Shoulder of police cannot be used to gain mileage if the aim is of that nature.”, the court added about the application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

Allegedly, in 'The Kapil Sharma Show', the comedian attempted to undermine the majesty of courts by picturising it offensively via a courtroom set. As per the version of the complainant-lawyer, on 21^st April 2021, Sharma depicted the court proceedings while taking a liquor bottle in his hands and exhibiting its consumption. The lawyer has also accused Sharma of meting out verbal and abusive comments in the set of the courtroom, which could potentially tarnish the image of the courts.

In the criminal revision filed earlier before the Additional Session Judge, the court took the stand that the complainant should collect and file evidence on his own since the complaint is based on a programme aired over television.

The complainant/ petitioner had requested the High Court to set aside the lower court orders by vehemently arguing that it was a fit case for police investigation. The state, in turn, submitted that the petitioner ought to lead the evidence on his own before the trial court.

After hearing the submissions made by both parties, Justice Pathak emphasised that Dhakad has already secured the recording of the programme which is the subject matter of controversy, along with pieces of electronic equipment like recorder and C.D. At this juncture, it's unclear as to what more evidence a station house officer, police station or investigating officer could collect, the court opined while dismissing the application.

Advocate Akshat Kumar Jain appeared for the complainant. Public Prosecutor Rajiv Upadhyay represented the state.

Case Title: Suresh Dhakad v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

Case No: Misc. Criminal Case No. 6703 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 63

Click Here To Read/Download Order