April 15, 2026 06:43 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'ECI deviated from Bihar procedure': Supreme Court raises concerns over voter deletion in Bengal SIR | Noida workers’ protest turns violent: Stones pelted, vehicles damaged over wage hike demand | Oil prices jump above $103 a barrel as US moves to block Iran-linked shipping | I don’t care if they come back or not, says Trump after Iran talks collapse | Legendary singer Asha Bhosle suffers cardiac arrest, hospitalised | Big boost to India–Mauritius ties: S. Jaishankar hands over 90 e-buses | Middle East tension: Iranian delegation arrives in Islamabad for major talks, 10,000 security personnel deployed | Ranveer Singh visits RSS HQ amid Dhurandhar 2 success, triggers speculation | ED raids ex-Bengal minister Partha Chatterjee; SSC scam resurfaces ahead of polls | Amit Shah promises UCC, ₹3,000 aid per month for women and youth in BJP’s Bengal manifesto
Amish Devgan

Supreme Court refuses to cancel FIRs against TV anchor Amish Devgan for Sufi saint remark

| @indiablooms | Dec 07, 2020, at 10:11 pm

New Delhi/UNI: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to quash multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) filed against television anchor Amish Devgan for allegedly hurting religious sentiments with his remarks against a Sufi saint.

The Apex Court bench comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna asserted that the journalist will get protection from any coercive action if he continues to cooperate with the probe.

The top court clubbed and transferred all the seven FIRs filed against Amish Devgan in different states, including Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Telangana, to Ajmer in Rajasthan.

Several police complaints and FIRs have been registered against Devgan across the country after he described the Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti as “attacker” and “lootera” (robber) during a debate he hosted on his show ‘Aar Par’ on June 15.

The show was debating public interest litigations (PILs) regarding the Place of Worship Special Provision Act.

Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for Devgan, had submitted that there was no "incitement of hate" or any attempt to "instigate a particular community against the other."

Devgan had already apologised for his remarks, terming as "inadvertent error."

"In 1 of my debates, I inadvertently referred to ‘Khilji’ as Chishti. I sincerely apologise for this grave error and the anguish it may have caused to followers of the Sufi saint Moinuddin Chisthi, whom I revere. I have in the past sought blessings at his dargah. I regret this error," he had said in a tweet.  

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.