ocial media content creator Amir Shokeen has faced fresh criticism after referring to Tripura as “Tripuram” in an apology video following allegations of racial harassment involving a young man from the northeastern state. The controversy began after a video allegedly showing Shokeen making derogatory remarks towards the youth circulated widely on social media. His subsequent apology did little to ease public anger, with critics questioning both the alleged conduct in the original video and the wording of his explanation.
The issue has attracted attention from political leaders, community organisations and social media users. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju condemned the alleged behaviour, while Tripura Chief Minister Manik Saha directed the state’s Director General of Police to coordinate with Delhi Police. Authorities are examining the matter, and the allegations remain subject to investigation.
Why Shokeen’s Apology Came Under Criticism
In his apology video, Shokeen reportedly said that the original interaction was scripted and intended for entertainment. He claimed that he knew the young man featured in the video through a friend and maintained that he had no intention of insulting the people of Tripura.
Shokeen expressed regret for any hurt caused by the video and apologised to those who felt offended. However, during the apology, he referred to Tripura as “Tripuram” and reportedly said that he was unfamiliar with the state.
That reference triggered further criticism. Several social media users questioned why the content creator appeared unfamiliar with the name of a northeastern Indian state while attempting to apologise for remarks that had allegedly targeted a person from there. Critics argued that an apology should demonstrate an understanding of the concerns raised by the affected community.
The controversy illustrates how an apology can itself attract further scrutiny when its wording is perceived as insensitive. However, reactions on social media do not establish the legal facts of a case, which must be assessed through an impartial investigation.
What Happened in the Original Video
The controversy began when a purported video featuring Shokeen and a young man from Tripura circulated online. According to media reports, the video allegedly showed the content creator making remarks about the youth’s appearance and regional identity, including references comparing him to a Chinese person.
The footage prompted criticism from people in Tripura and other parts of Northeast India. Several commentators argued that mocking someone’s appearance or identity based on their perceived ethnicity reinforces harmful stereotypes and should not be dismissed as comedy.
Shokeen subsequently maintained that the interaction was scripted and that the young man was known to people in his circle. His explanation has become part of the public debate, but it does not independently settle the circumstances surrounding the recording. Investigators will need to examine the available evidence to establish what happened and whether any laws were violated.
The identity and account of the young man involved, the context of the recording and the circumstances in which the footage was published are important aspects of the case. These details should be verified by the authorities rather than inferred solely from the viral clip.
Kiren Rijiju and Tripura Chief Minister Call for Action
Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju publicly condemned the alleged conduct. In a post on social media platform X on October 21, 2026, he said that the person responsible would face consequences and called on Delhi Police and Tripura Police to take action.
Tripura Chief Minister Manik Saha also directed the state’s Director General of Police to coordinate with Delhi Police over the alleged derogatory remarks. The Chief Minister’s Office stated that the law would take its course.
Political leaders across party lines expressed concern about the alleged treatment of the youth. Tipra Motha Party founder Pradyot Kishore Manikya Debbarma condemned the incident, while Tripura Leader of the Opposition Jitendra Chaudhury called for strict action. Other representatives also raised concerns about racial profiling and the treatment of people from Northeast India.
These responses have increased pressure on the authorities to investigate the matter promptly and fairly. Any legal action, however, must be based on the evidence collected and the applicable law.
Delhi Police Examines the Viral Video
According to a report published by Moneycontrol on October 22, Delhi Police’s Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations unit will investigate the video. The Special Police Unit for North Eastern Region reportedly referred the matter to the unit for examination.
Media reports also stated that police personnel visited Shokeen’s residence but did not find him there. This information was attributed to a police official and should be understood as a reported development rather than a final finding in the case.
The investigation may involve examining the original recording, the circumstances in which it was made, the social media accounts associated with its publication and any other relevant digital evidence. Complaints have called for the authorities to identify the people involved and assess whether the alleged remarks and conduct warrant legal action.
The police will need to establish the facts before determining the next steps. Public criticism, political statements and an apology are relevant to the wider controversy, but they do not replace the legal process.
Complaints and Demands for Accountability
Community and political organisations in Tripura have sought action over the alleged remarks. Reports stated that the Youth Tipra Federation, associated with the Tipra Motha Party, submitted a complaint alleging racial harassment and derogatory remarks against the state’s indigenous people.
The Tripura Students Forum Delhi also reportedly approached the authorities, seeking an impartial investigation. The complaints called for the preservation of relevant digital evidence and verification of the identities and roles of those involved.
The allegations made in these complaints have to be examined by the police. Whether a particular act constitutes a criminal offence will depend on the evidence and the legal provisions applicable to the case.
Wider Concerns About Racial Stereotypes
The incident has renewed discussion about racial discrimination faced by people from Northeast India in other parts of the country. Community members have repeatedly raised concerns about derogatory comments based on physical appearance, ethnicity and regional identity.
The latest controversy has also highlighted the responsibilities of online content creators. Comedy and scripted videos can reach large audiences, but content that appears to ridicule a person’s identity can provoke serious concerns about dignity and discrimination.
The debate surrounding Shokeen’s apology shows that the language used in public statements matters, particularly when a community feels it has been targeted. An effective response requires sensitivity to the concerns raised and a clear account of what happened.
The case remains under examination. Shokeen has reportedly apologised and described the video as scripted, while critics continue to demand accountability. The next steps will depend on the findings of Delhi Police and the relevant authorities. Until those findings are available, the allegations should be reported carefully and should not be presented as established guilt.
