Cyber police submit chargesheet against YouTuber Thoppi

Ernakulam Rural Cyber Police have submitted a chargesheet against YouTuber Mohammad Nihad, popularly known as Thoppi, before the Ernakulam Chief Judicial Magistrate Court over the alleged publication of obscene material on social media.

The chargesheet, filed in a case registered in June, invokes provisions of the Information Technology Act and maintains that the allegations against Nihad are supported by evidence gathered during the investigation. The proceedings concern the alleged circulation of intimate images involving people previously associated with the social media personality.

Police allege that the material was published following a dispute between Nihad and former friends. Investigators have recorded his account of the disagreement, including his contention that people close to him had betrayed his trust. That explanation forms part of the investigation record but does not determine whether the alleged publication constituted an offence.

The filing moves the case from police investigation towards judicial scrutiny. The magistrate must consider the final report and accompanying material before deciding the next procedural steps. Submission of a chargesheet is not a finding of guilt, and the allegations remain subject to examination in court.

The case originated from a complaint submitted by advocate Sreejith Perumana after images allegedly involving Nihad’s associates circulated online. Ernakulam Rural Police registered the case on June 20 and examined the material shared through social media accounts. The complaint raised questions about the publication of private images and the legality of distributing sexually explicit content without the consent of those depicted.

Investigators subsequently sought Nihad’s appearance for questioning. Police issued notices asking him to cooperate with the inquiry, but he did not initially appear. Authorities also issued a lookout circular as efforts continued to secure his participation in the investigation. He subsequently appeared for questioning, allowing officers to record his version of events.

Nihad had also approached the court seeking anticipatory bail. That application was disposed of before the chargesheet was submitted. The filing does not, by itself, establish that he has been convicted or that every allegation made during the dispute has been accepted by investigators.

The police investigation centred on content allegedly uploaded after relations deteriorated among members of Nihad’s online circle. The dispute became public when former associates exchanged accusations through videos and social media statements. Nihad rejected accusations made against him and offered his own account of the breakdown in their relationship.

The inquiry into the alleged publication of obscene content must be distinguished from other accusations aired during that confrontation. Former associates made separate claims concerning drug use and sexual misconduct, including allegations involving minors. Those claims are not established findings in the present chargesheet, and no conclusion about their truth can be drawn from the filing concerning online material.

The Information Technology Act contains provisions dealing with the electronic publication or transmission of obscene material. Whether particular material meets the legal requirements for prosecution depends on its content, the circumstances of publication and the evidence presented. The precise statutory subsections invoked in the final report have not been independently established from the available account of the filing.

The controversy also led to action against Nihad’s YouTube presence. His official channel was removed in July following a police complaint about allegedly obscene and harmful material. Police had communicated their concerns to the platform after registering the criminal case. The removal was a platform action and should not be confused with a judicial determination of criminal liability.

Jurisdiction became an issue during the initial inquiry. Preliminary examination by Kochi City Cyber Police and Kalamassery Police was followed by the rural police investigation after the alleged online activity was traced to Varapuzha, where Nihad was then residing. The Ernakulam Rural Cyber Police subsequently handled the case and the questioning connected with it.

Nihad developed a substantial following through gaming broadcasts and live streams, particularly among younger viewers. The dispute involving his former associates drew wider attention because the competing allegations and videos circulated publicly across social media platforms.

The complaint that initiated the investigation was submitted by Perumana, who had also sought examination of additional allegations raised during the public dispute. The chargesheet now before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court specifically concerns the alleged circulation of obscene content online, rather than the public allegations exchanged online.