top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

YouTuber challenges FIR, LoC in HC

Mumbai : The Bombay High Court issued notice to the state government on a petition filed by UK-based medico and YouTuber, Dr. Sangram Patil, seeking to quash a Mumbai Police FIR and revoking a Look Out Circular in a criminal case lodged against him, on Thursday.   Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe, who heard the matter with preliminary submissions from both sides, sought a response from the state government and posted the matter for Feb. 4.   Maharashtra Advocate-General Milind Sathe informed the court...

YouTuber challenges FIR, LoC in HC

Mumbai : The Bombay High Court issued notice to the state government on a petition filed by UK-based medico and YouTuber, Dr. Sangram Patil, seeking to quash a Mumbai Police FIR and revoking a Look Out Circular in a criminal case lodged against him, on Thursday.   Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe, who heard the matter with preliminary submissions from both sides, sought a response from the state government and posted the matter for Feb. 4.   Maharashtra Advocate-General Milind Sathe informed the court that the state would file its reply within a week in the matter.   Indian-origin Dr. Patil, hailing from Jalgaon, is facing a criminal case here for posting allegedly objectionable content involving Bharatiya Janata Party leaders on social media.   After his posts on a FB page, ‘Shehar Vikas Aghadi’, a Mumbai BJP media cell functionary lodged a criminal complaint following which the NM Joshi Marg Police registered a FIR (Dec. 18, 2025) and subsequently issued a LoC against Dr. Patil, restricting his travels.   The complainant Nikhil Bhamre filed the complaint in December 2025, contending that Dr. Patil on Dec. 14 posted offensive content intended to spread ‘disinformation and falsehoods’ about the BJP and its leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi.   Among others, the police invoked BNSS Sec. 353(2) that attracts a 3-year jail term for publishing or circulating statements or rumours through electronic media with intent to promote enmity or hatred between communities.   Based on the FIR, Dr. Patil was detained and questioned for 15 hours when he arrived with his wife from London at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport (Jan. 10), and again prevented from returning to Manchester, UK on Jan. 19 in view of the ongoing investigations.   On Wednesday (Jan. 21) Dr. Patil recorded his statement before the Mumbai Police and now he has moved the high court. Besides seeking quashing of the FIR and the LoC, he has sought removal of his name from the database imposing restrictions on his international travels.   Through his Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola, the medico has sought interim relief in the form of a stay on further probe by Crime Branch-III and coercive action, restraint on filing any charge-sheet during the pendency of the petition and permission to go back to the UK.   Pasbola submitted to the court that Dr. Patil had voluntarily travelled from the UK to India and was unaware of the FIR when he landed here. Sathe argued that Patil had appeared in connection with other posts and was not fully cooperating with the investigators.

A Self-Inflicted Blow

Updated: Nov 25, 2024

Manoj Jarange-Patil

Ahead of the results, the Maratha quota movement, a simmering issue in the state’s politics for nearly 14 months, finds itself embroiled in a series of missteps and contradictions thanks in no small part to Manoj Jarange-Patil’s erratic leadership. Poised to play the role of a kingmaker in the Marathwada region in the run-up to the Assembly polls, Jarange-Patil’s vacillation on whether or not to field candidates for the upcoming polls, and his constant flip-flops, has undermined his own cause and diminished the potency of Maratha political mobilization in the region.


Marathwada, which comprises 46 assembly seats, was a key battleground in the Lok Sabha election this year where it had swung decisively against the ruling Mahayuti alliance, costing the BJP heavily.


Agrarian distress and the Maratha reservation issue brought to life by Jarange-Patil had taken centre stage among the electorate here. Long disillusioned with the establishment, sections of the Maratha community were expected to channel their grievances into a potent force against the ruling coalition this time as well.


However, the reality seems different. Jarange-Patil, with his trademark firebrand speeches, had initially rallied the community ahead of November 20 with calls of ‘revenge’ against the BJP-led Mahayuti for allegedly betraying Marathas over their reservation demands.


His dramatic announcement that he would field candidates had added to the growing pressure on the ruling parties. However, days before the polls, he performed a stunning volte-face, withdrawing the plan to field candidates by citing a lack of coordination with other caste groups and political parties. In a region where caste dynamics are a key factor, the BJP had fielded Maratha candidates in 28 of the 46 constituencies in a bid to take the wind out of Jarange-Patil’s sails.


The Maratha reservation issue, shot through with Jarange-Patil’s seemingly endless strike – a spectacle which had held Maharashtra hostage - has largely lost its steam. Jarange-Patil’s bewildering decision to reverse within a week of threatening to field candidates ensured that the quota issue would not emerge as a defining electoral debate in this region.


For the long term, this abrupt change of stance has left the Maratha community in a state of confusion. Had Jarange-Patil stuck to his guns, his entry into the electoral fray would not only have undercut the Mahayuti’s candidates but cemented his persona as a demagogue not to be trifled with. Now, by taking a step back, he has weakened the movement’s influence, costing the Maratha cause much-needed momentum. For all his earlier fire, the Maratha agitation now risks losing its teeth after the results on November 23.


The impact of Jarange-Patil’s deeds has heightened rifts within the Maratha and Other Backward Classes (OBC) communities in Maratha in the past 14 months. The conflict over quotas has deepened divisions, with OBC groups mobilizing in direct opposition to Jarange-Patil’s Maratha-centric protests.

Jarange-Patil’s decision to not field candidates did little to consolidate the Maratha vote, potentially leaving the community’s grievances unaddressed at the ballot box.


The Maratha community remains angry and mobilized, but without a clear, cohesive plan or leadership. While the activist has continued to make tall claims of pressing the demands of the Marathas on the new government formed after the November 23, the final analysis may well be that Jarange-Patil’s ‘self-inflicted wounds’ may do more to benefit the Mahayuti than to further the cause of the Maratha community he once sought to lead.

Comments


bottom of page