The Delhi High Court on Thursday said it will direct the removal of defamatory social media content targeting BJP leader and Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, following the circulation of memes and videos mocking his appearance on a recent television news show.
Justice Amit Bansal observed during the hearing that if the offending entities do not remove the material, the Court will ask intermediary platforms hosting the content to take it down.
“We will order take down of defamatory videos. If they are not taken down by the defendants, the intermediary will do it. We will pass orders,” the Court orally remarked.
Background of the Case
The controversy began earlier this month when Bhatia appeared on a News18 show hosted by journalist Amish Devgan. During the introduction, he was seen wearing a kurta without visible pyjama or trousers. Soon after, a wave of memes and edited videos spread across social media, many using derogatory language to describe his attire.
On September 23, Bhatia personally appeared before the Court along with Advocate Raghav Awasthi. Awasthi clarified that Bhatia was in fact wearing shorts, and the cameraman mistakenly showed the lower half of his body. He argued that the posts violated Bhatia’s privacy and urged the Court to direct their removal.
Bhatia told the Court, “I stand before you because reputation is earned over decades. People on social media cannot be allowed to use derogatory words like ‘nanga’ (nude).”
Submissions Before the Court
At Thursday’s hearing, Bhatia reiterated that the continued circulation of such content went beyond free speech and constituted defamation.
“This can’t be freedom of speech, this can’t be humour and satire if you go to this extent to defame a person who has earned his reputation through hard work. I am asking for an order to be passed against them and to restrain them,” he submitted.
Appearing for Google, Advocate Mamta Rani Jha argued that any initial takedown orders should be directed against the websites or social media handles responsible, and only if they failed to comply should intermediary platforms be asked to act.
“There are defendants like Newslaundry and Delhi Patrika… when your lordships are passing the orders, the first direction has to be passed to the defendants and then to the intermediary,” Jha said.
Court’s Observations
Justice Bansal indicated agreement with this approach, stating that the Court would first direct the offending parties to remove the content. If they failed to comply, intermediary platforms would then be required to act.
The Court is expected to issue formal directions in the matter shortly.
