Imagine two worlds.

In one, you file a police complaint. Within hours, the cops spring into action. An FIR is promptly registered. Twenty-hour hours later, dozens are summoned and interrogated. Justice feels swift, almost cinematic. 

Now, picture another world. You file a complaint. You’re ignored. You spend days chasing the police just to get an FIR registered. Weeks turn into months into years – still no chargesheet. The police say they’re “waiting” for sanctions from the government to prosecute. Or the chargesheet is finally filed, but the wait continues. Justice is a distant dream, a fictitious concept, drowned in bureaucracy and indifference.

In India, both these worlds are true – lightning speed versus a tedious crawl. 

Case #1 involved YouTubers and ‘influencers’ making bad jokes. Case #2 could be a man assaulted on suspicion of carrying beef when he was going to visit his daughter, an influential leader giving a hate speech, a mosque vandalised by a mob.

Case #2, in fact, applies to uncountable examples in India of police apathy, delayed justice and the expenditure of time and money. It applies to everyday people for whom the wheels of justice grind slowly, sometimes forever, with little or no recourse.  

Which India applies to you?

Case #1: Outrage and morality 

Case #1 was picked up by primetime and politicians across the board, nudging out other news events like a chief minister resigning after almost 650 days of ethnic violence in his state.

India Got Latent is a comedy show co-hosted by Samir Raina and Balraj Singh Ghai. It’s a hit among young viewers for its ‘edgy’, often crass humour. It exploded into a national controversy when YouTuber and podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia, also known as BeerBiceps, pitched a ‘would you rather’ question to a contestant. 

“Would you rather watch your parents have sex every day for the rest of your life or join in once and stop it forever?” he said.

India’s social order collapsed. The lines between parties dissolved. WhatsApp exploded in a flurry of outrage. 

The thing is, India’s Got Latent has always been semi-controversial. Judges and contestants are often obnoxious – perhaps even unhinged – as part of their banter. They’ve insulted disabilities, mocked Deepika Padukone’s mental health, made inane comments about the RG Kar rape case. Urfi Javed, who appeared as a guest judge, was compared to adult actor Mia Khalifa with questions about her “body count”. 

But the lakshman rekha is marked, clearly, by parents and sex. 

One of the first people to denounce the remarks was Neelesh Mishra, a journalist and lyricist, who called them “banal”, “crass” and “insensitive”, accusing creators of “stooping lower and lower for audience reach and revenue”. Actor Rajpal Yadav called it “cheap publicity” and filmmaker Boney Kapoor called for “self-censorship”.

Then the politicians waded in. Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate said we “can’t normalise pervert behaviour as cool”. Goa’s tourism minister Rohan Khaunte of the BJP said influencers like Allahbadia represent the “rot that’s eating into our social fabric”. 

Next came the police action. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma tweeted that the Guwahati police had registered an FIR against several YouTubers and influencers. The FIR named Allahbadia, Raina and others for “promoting obscenity and engaging in sexually explicit and vulgar discussions”. 

Within three days of the show, a team was dispatched to Pune to serve legal notices to those involved. By then, co-host Samay Raina had removed all episodes of India’s Got Latent from YouTube saying his “only objective was to make people laugh”. 

Mumbai’s cybercrime cell turned up the heat by registering an FIR against Allahbadia and approximately 30 others under the Information Technology Act. It also summoned between 30 and 40 people for questioning – a slew of mid-level celebrities, from Tanmay Bhat to Urfi Javed to Rakhi Sawant, who “acted as judges, artists and hosts” on episodes one to six of India’s Got Latent. The IGP of the cybercell, Yashasvi Yadav, told this reporter to “wait sometime” for more updates. Meanwhile, one complaint was filed in Madhya Pradesh too.

It was a textbook example of swift police action. 

Allahbadia apologised and said comedy wasn’t his strong suit. He moved the Supreme Court to quash the FIRs against him but the court turned down his request for an urgent hearing. 

The speed of this legal spiral was almost dizzying. 

Case #2: The ‘normal’ India 

But how does the police approach other cases of hate speech and crime?

On August 30, 2024, Ashraf Ali Sayyad Hussan Maniar, 72, boarded a train from Jalgaon to Kalyan – a routine trip that he takes to visit his daughter’s village. Except during this journey, a group of men thrashed him, claiming he was transporting beef.

They “punched him in the face, chest, and stomach, hurled abuses, snatched his phone, and recorded the assault on multiple devices before posting it on social media”, as reported at the time.

His son Ashfaq Maniar filed a police complaint in Thane. An FIR was registered. The videos of the assault went viral. Three men out of six accused were arrested on charges of criminal intimidation, unlawful assembly, rioting, wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, breach of peace, and public mischief. They were released on bail a day later. 

Since then, there’s been no update. “We only know that one chargesheet has been filed,” Ashfaq said, “but the police won’t share any details.”

Yet by the normal standard of policework, this is progress. After all, at least an FIR was filed and arrests were made. Most people get less. 

Police action seems even more diluted when it comes to supposedly nebulous allegations like hate speech. According to India Hate Lab, Maharashtra recorded 210 instances of hate speech last year, the second highest in India after Uttar Pradesh. 195 of these instances were explicitly anti-Muslim. Among those fingered for making these speeches are influential Hindu nationalists like Kajal Hindustani, Harsha Thakur, Suresh Chavhanke and BJP legislators Nitish Rane and T Raja Singh.

Raqib Hameed Naik, the executive director of the Center for the Study of Organized Hate, which runs the India Hate Lab project, told Newslaundry that in Maharashtra, “investigations rarely progress beyond FIR registration” even though some police officers “show a willingness to act under Supreme Court directives”. He attributed this stagnation to political pressure.

This is why everyday people are forced to approach the courts. In February 2024, for example, BJP leader Rane made a hate speech in Malvani. A local resident named Sheikh Anwar told Newslaundry, “We pursued the police to file an FIR but they did nothing. It took a high court petition for them to act and even then, no arrests have been made.”

Lawyer Lara Jesani, who represents some victims in cases of hate crime and hate speech, said the police often delay FIRs and avoid making arrests. She cited two cases – hate speech by  BJP leader Vikram Pawaskar in Sangli in the year 2023, and a few months later, a mosque vandalised and a man lynched by a mob in Satara. 

“In both instances, FIRs were filed belatedly under public pressure. Despite the delays, no arrests were made,” she said.

Jesani explained that even when FIRs are registered, they are often delayed or investigations are incomplete. “For example, one speech was made in January 2023, but the FIR was filed only in May. Another speech in June saw an FIR at the end of the month. This was also following the order of the Supreme Court directing police to suo moto register FIRs in hate speech incidents. Still, no arrests were made in any of these cases.”

In September 2024, The Indian Express reported that out of 25 FIRs related to hate crime or hate speech filed between January and April 2023, no chargesheet had been filed in 19 cases. FIRs in these cases typically include charges like promoting enmity and outraging religious feelings. 

The report noted that section 196 of the erstwhile Criminal Procedure Code indicates that the police must seek permission from the home department while filing charges in “such sensitive cases”. This provision remains unchanged under the new Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

“The requirement for state sanction in hate speech cases is the main reason for delay in even trial being started,” Jesani explained. In the Sangli case involving BJP’s Pawaskar, who was accused of making two hate speeches in Sangli, FIRs were registered but no arrests were made and chargesheets have also not followed due to the absence of government sanction.  

“Despite police presence and viral videos confirming his identity, the government claimed a forensic analysis was needed. Even after the analysis confirmed it was him, prosecution sanction has not followed for over six months,” she added.

So, the wait for justice continues, even as the police storm across the country over an influencer who outraged India’s morality. 

That’s how justice seems to work.

We don’t believe in double standards. That’s why we don’t take ads, because how can you report on governments and corporates when you’re financially depend on them? Instead, we depend on our subscribers, and you can be one too. Click here to subscribe.