The Bombay High Court on Thursday issued a notice to the Mumbai police on a petition filed by UK-based doctor and YouTuber Sangram Patil, who has been booked for allegedly posting objectionable content on social media targeting leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Patil has sought quashing of the FIR as well as the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against him.
A single-judge bench of Justice Ashwin Bhobe directed the police to respond by filing an affidavit and posted the matter for further hearing on February 4.
Patil, a British citizen of Indian origin and native of Jalgaon, was first detained at Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport on January 10, upon his arrival from the UK. He was reportedly questioned for over 15 hours. On January 16, when he attempted to return to Manchester, he was again stopped and not permitted to leave the country due to the LOC.
According to his petition, Patil claimed he had no prior knowledge of the FIR registered against him and had returned to India voluntarily. The FIR, registered in December 2025, is based on a complaint filed by Nikhil Bhamre, the Maharashtra BJP’s social media coordinator. Bhamre alleged that he came across the objectionable post online, informed party leaders, and subsequently approached the police.
During Thursday’s hearing, Patil’s counsel Sudeep Pasbola submitted that his client had not been served any notice of the FIR and was unaware of the same until he was stopped at the airport. Pasbola contended that Patil has been fully cooperating with the investigation and has already appeared before the Mumbai Police’s crime branch for questioning on three occasions.
However, Advocate General Milind Sathe, representing the state, claimed that Patil was not cooperating with the investigation.
Despite the state’s contention, the High Court declined to pass any immediate interim relief and instead issued notice to the police, directing them to submit their response on affidavit.
The matter will now be taken up on February 4. Until then, the court has not passed any stay on the proceedings or relief on the LOC.
