Delhi High Court Orders Removal of Defamatory Posts Against Raghav Chadha

The Delhi High Court has ruled in favor of Raghav Chadha, ordering the removal of five online posts that were found to be defamatory. The court's decision highlights the delicate balance between political criticism and personality rights. While Chadha sought broader protections against manipulated content following his party switch, the court limited its ruling to specific posts. This case raises important questions about the nature of online content and its implications for public figures in the political arena. Read on to discover more about the court's findings and the arguments presented during the hearings.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jul 1, 2026, 11:53 IST

Court Ruling on Defamatory Online Content

File image of Raghav Chadda(Photo: @AmitKrdangi)

New Delhi, July 1: The Delhi High Court has mandated the removal of five online posts deemed prima facie defamatory towards Raghav Chadha, a member of the Rajya Sabha from the BJP. Chadha had requested the court to eliminate manipulated content suggesting he had "sold himself for money" following his transition from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Despite this, Justice Subramonium Prasad, presiding over a single-judge Bench, declined to issue a broad interim order for the removal of additional content or to extend protections regarding Chadha's personality and publicity rights.

Justice Prasad stated that the case did not appear to involve a breach of personality rights, noting, "There is no personality right involved. I have ordered the removal of only five documents. The rest are not prima facie defamatory."

Chadha's petition sought to safeguard his personality and publicity rights against unauthorized use of his name, image, and identity across various online platforms, including AI-generated and altered content.

The application also requested the removal of synthetic voice cloning and fabricated speeches that allegedly circulated following his recent party switch.

During a previous hearing, Justice Prasad had indicated that the content flagged by Chadha seemed to be political criticism rather than a violation of personality rights.

He remarked, "Prima facie, there is no personality right involved in this case. A decision taken by you in a political arena is being criticized," highlighting the fine line between criticism and defamation.

Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, representing Chadha, argued that some posts crossed the line into defamation, falsely depicting the MP as having "sold himself for money." He referenced images showing the Prime Minister giving Chadha cash and other altered visuals, seeking interim relief for their removal due to their damaging nature. However, the court noted that the matter seemed to pertain more to defamation than personality rights.

Justice Prasad suggested that if Chadha wished to pursue defamation claims, he might need to amend his complaint.