38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, May 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Executive

Ban Imposed On Comedian Kunal Kamra Not Illegal, Clarifies DGCA

By LawStreet News Network      31 January, 2020 01:01 PM      0 Comments
Ban Imposed On Comedian Kunal Kamra Not Illegal, Clarifies DGCA

After questions were raised on the ban imposed on comedian Kunal Kamra, by four major domestic airlines, including IndiGo, Air India, Go Air and Spice jet, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) in a statement on Wednesday (January 29, 2020) said, "This is to reiterate that the action taken by the airlines is in complete consonance with Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) Section-3, Series M Part VI on handling of unruly passengers."  It further added, "Now the matter is to be referred to the internal committee as prescribed in para 6.1 of the said CAR (Civil Aviation Requirements). Further, as per para 6.4 of the CAR, the internal committee is to give the final decision in 30 days by giving the reasons in writing, which shall be binding on the airline concerned. Punishment for different type of unruly behaviour is also prescribed in the same CAR and the internal committee has to adhere to the same."

After Kunal Kamra, a Mumbai based comedian tweeted a video, where he is seen confronting Republic TV journalist Arnab Goswami, asking him whether he is a coward or a journalist, throughout the 1.51 minute video Arnab doesnt respond to any of Karmas questions. The airlines was quick to take an action and barred Kamra from flying with them for a period of 6 months. The Minister of State for Civil Aviation Hardeep Singh Puri, also tweeted about the incident and advised other airlines to take same measures. Following which Air India, Spice jet and Go Air have banned Karma till further notice. 



Arun Kumar, the Director General of Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) speaking to a HuffPost journalist  said that a 6 months' ban on Kunal Kamra by IndiGo and subsequent bans announced by other airlines, is a violation of the Civil Aviation Requirement Rules, under CAR Section 3, Series M, PartVI on Handling of Unruly Passengers. Further Kumar explained that in case of any unruly behaviour, like verbal spats or confrontations, the airlines should first impose a temporary ban of 30 days on the passenger and order an internal enquiry into the incident headed by a retired judge.

According to the CAR rules unruly behaviour that is verbally unruly, and in those cases operator can debar a passenger for upto 3 months, but in Kamras case the airlines have announced a 6 months' ban even though there was only verbal confrontation as seen in the video. Further the rules require a complaint to be made to the pilot-in-command, which would be probed by an internal committee ordered by the airlines and headed by a district and sessions judge and should have representatives from different scheduled airlines, passengers association/consumer, association/retired officer of Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum as members. The internal committee will decide the matter within 30 days and give a specified period of ban on the unruly passenger. 

While the committee conducts its enquiry and the airline may ban the said passenger. The airlines are further required to share the non-fly list with DGCA and other operators and same shall be published on DGCA website but other airlines are not bound by the no-fly list. In Kamras case no inquiry was held before IndiGo announced a 6 months' ban. DGCA has in its statement also stated director Arun Kumars statements to HuffPost India were misrepresented and the ban imposed on Kamra adhere to the rules laid down in CAR. 

Author: Antra Shourya 



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

no-offence-under-sc-st-act-if-alleged-casteist-abuse-occurred-inside-private-house-sc
Trending Judiciary
No Offence Under SC/ST Act If Alleged Casteist Abuse Occurred Inside Private House: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules SC/ST Act offence is not made out if alleged casteist abuse occurred inside a private house without public view.

14 May, 2026 03:16 PM
madras-hc-bars-tiruppattur-mla-from-floor-test-over-disputed-one-vote-victory
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Bars Tiruppattur MLA From Floor Test Over Disputed One-Vote Victory [Read Order]

Madras High Court restrains Tiruppattur MLA from floor test participation over disputed one-vote victory and alleged electoral irregularities.

14 May, 2026 03:24 PM

TOP STORIES

delhi-hc-refers-to-larger-bench-issue-on-stage-of-hearing-accused-under-section-223-bnss-before-cognizance
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Refers to Larger Bench Issue on Stage of Hearing Accused Under Section 223 BNSS Before Cognizance [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court refers to Larger Bench issue on when accused must be heard under Section 223 BNSS before taking cognizance.

09 May, 2026 10:25 AM
hymen-intact-does-not-mean-no-penetration-delhi-high-court-upholds-pocso-conviction-of-tenant-who-raped-six-year-old-girl
Trending Judiciary
‘Hymen Intact Does Not Mean No Penetration’: Delhi High Court Upholds POCSO Conviction of Tenant Who Raped Six-Year-Old Girl [Read Order]

Delhi High Court upheld a tenant’s POCSO conviction for raping a six-year-old girl, holding that an intact hymen does not negate penetration.

09 May, 2026 12:42 PM
consumer-commission-directs-bus-operator-to-pay-50000-compensation-after-barat-reaches-wedding-destination-at-3-am-due-to-breakdown
Trending Judiciary
Consumer Commission Directs Bus Operator to Pay ₹50,000 Compensation After Barat Reaches Wedding Destination at 3 AM Due to Breakdown [Read Order]

Delhi Consumer Commission ordered a bus operator to pay ₹50,000 compensation after a Barat reached the wedding venue at 3 AM due to breakdown.

09 May, 2026 01:56 PM
sabarimala-reference-day-13-can-faith-justify-civil-death-and-genital-cutting-of-children-sc-bench-examines-religions-reach-over-the-body
Trending Judiciary
Sabarimala Reference Day 13: “Can Faith Justify Civil Death and Genital Cutting of Children?”: SC Bench Examines Religion’s Reach Over the Body

SC’s nine-judge bench examined whether religious practices violating dignity, bodily autonomy and conscience can claim protection under Article 26.

09 May, 2026 02:25 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email