MUMBAI, Oct. 20 -- The state government's law and judiciary department has cautioned the state legislature about the breach of privilege motion moved against stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra for his comments on deputy chief minister Eknath Shinde. In its report, the department has reportedly stated that Kamra's satirical performance does not amount to a breach of privilege although the language he used in his replies to the privileges committee was offensive and warranted a pull-up. The motion was moved by BJP MLC Pravin Darekar on March 26, 2025 for the "derogatory" language Kamra used for Shinde. Kamra's comic song, which obliquely referred to Shinde as a traitor, went viral and triggered a row within the ruling Mahayuti alliance. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sushama Andhare is also facing similar action for supporting Kamra. Kamra appeared before the privileges committee headed by BJP MLC Prasad Lad in April and refused to apologise for his remarks. He also submitted his defence in two separate written submissions to the committee. Following his last hearing in April, the committee sought a legal opinion from the law and judiciary department and advocate-general Milind Sathe. While Sathe is yet to submit his opinion, the legislature expects a similar opinion from him. "He is likely to submit it in the next few days," said an MLA. "Once both opinions are available, a final meeting of the committee will be held before its report is submitted during the winter session." A Mantralaya official said that the law and judiciary department cited various cases, including 'Sita Soren vs Union of India', in which the Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that lawmakers do not enjoy immunity from prosecution for bribery under Articles 105(2) and 194(2) of the Constitution. "The court has also referred to other cases, including P V Narasimha Rao and Amrinder Singh, heard by various courts in connection with legislative privileges," he added. "The report concludes that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) must be considered, and the privileges committee should thus proceed cautiously." The report has, however, recommended reprimanding Kamra for the language used in his submissions. "His submissions are arrogant and offensive," the official said. "He has ridiculed the legislators who moved or supported the motion, suggesting that they do not understand satire and freedom of speech. Similar language, reflecting no remorse, was used in his second submission as well. The law and judiciary department has pointed out that he could be made to appear before the legislature for this and reprimanded." The official added that the department's report had also highlighted the interplay between Article 194(3), which deals with the powers, privileges and immunities of state legislatures and their members, and Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. Officials in the state legislature are also mindful of the earlier privilege motions involving author Shobhaa De and journalist Arnab Goswami, who had approached the Supreme Court, putting the state legislature on the backfoot. "A section of officials in the state legislature believes that the legislature should have a separate law governing its privileges rather than relying solely on the relevant constitutional provisions," said another official....