/
Kerala Police book North Indian vlogger over Fort Kochi video; leaders condemn communal remarks
Kochi City Police have registered a case against vlogger Amrit Singh Darren under Sections 353(2) and 192 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita over a video about Kashi Art Cafe in Fort Kochi. The Muslim Youth League had complained, and Kerala's political leaders have condemned the remarks.
P
4 min
Kochi City Police have registered a case against a North Indian travel vlogger, Amrit Singh Darren, over a video he posted about Kashi Art Cafe in Fort Kochi, which the police say contained remarks likely to promote communal enmity. The case was registered under two sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and political leaders in Kerala from different parties have condemned the video.
What the video is said to contain
The video was posted on Instagram on 22 October. According to reports, the vlogger objected to the display of portraits of Mahatma Gandhi and Muhammad Ali Jinnah together at the cafe, and to the serving of beef, and made sweeping claims about the share of Muslims among business owners, taxi and auto drivers, small traders and street vendors in the area. He also said that residents with right-wing views were afraid to speak openly. The Instagram handle is spelled in different ways in different reports.
The video drew a strong reaction on social media in Kerala. Fort Kochi is a heritage and tourist area in which several communities have lived and traded together for centuries, and the cafe is a known stop for visitors.
The charges
Police registered the First Information Report on 24 October, according to one report, after a complaint from the Ernakulam district committee of the Muslim Youth League asking for action against the vlogger. The sections invoked are:
- Section 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which covers statements or information circulated to promote, or likely to promote, enmity or hatred between religious, racial, linguistic or regional groups, castes or communities;
- Section 192, which covers malicious or wanton acts intended to provoke, with the intention or knowledge that this is likely to lead to rioting.
As the Sanhita is generally read, Section 353(2) carries a punishment of up to three years in prison, a fine or both, while Section 192 provides for up to one year if a riot actually follows from the provocation and up to six months if it does not. No arrest has been reported, and the vlogger's response has not been published in the reports available. A case is a start of a legal process, and it does not mean that a court has found the charges proved.
Kerala's Chief Minister, V.D. Satheesan, and the Leader of the Opposition, Pinarayi Vijayan, condemned the video. Vijayan alleged that the Sangh Parivar was outsourcing hate campaigns to online provocateurs. The Kerala BJP president, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, said that Satheesan was right in principle but wrong in how he practised communal harmony, and a report quoted the party's state leadership as saying that Kerala has no need for outsiders to teach it secularism. The state's leaders from both sides have therefore criticised the tone of the video, though they disagree about who is behind such content.
The case has had a side effect. Diya Krishna, a content creator and the daughter of BJP leader Krishna Kumar, left a comment reading 'sad reality' under the video, and later apologised, saying she had watched only the first part of it.
Why it matters
The video also raises the question of what the platform does. Posts that promote hatred can be reported to the platform under its own rules, and the police can ask for content to be blocked under the Information Technology Act. Whether the video stays up or is taken down, the case will show how quickly the state and the platform respond when a post from outside the state targets a local community.
The case is a test of how Kerala's police treat provocative content from outside the state. Travel and food vloggers have a large audience, and a video that picks on a community in a particular place can bring crowds, abuse and threats to the people who live and work there. Kerala has taken action against such content before, and the Chief Minister has described the response as a warning to online provocateurs.
For the cafe and its neighbours, the immediate worry is harassment. For the platform, the question is whether the video will be taken down, and for the courts the issue will be where the line falls between a vlogger's opinion and an offence. The line is not simple. Speech that objects to the sale of a food item or the display of a portrait is not an offence by itself. Speech that singles out a community, makes broad claims about it and is likely to cause public disorder can be.
P
4 min
What did you think?
