Delhi High Court Orders Removal of Defamatory Content Against Raghav Chadha

The Delhi High Court issued a directive on Wednesday to eliminate certain derogatory content targeting Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha. The court clarified that the issue of 'personality rights' was not applicable in this case. During the hearing of Chadha's petition, Justice Subramaniam Prasad noted that only a few pieces of content cited by the petitioner were deemed offensive. In delivering the order, the judge stated, 'I have instructed the removal of certain content... the remaining content is not offensive.' The court also emphasized that no issues related to personality rights were raised in this lawsuit, focusing solely on the allegations of defamation.

This recent ruling provided some relief for Chadha. A few weeks prior, the same judge had denied him interim relief. The judge remarked that criticism, satire, and cartoons of political figures cannot be suppressed simply because they are unappealing. The case originated from social media posts that allegedly criticized Chadha for transitioning from the Aam Aadmi Party to the Bharatiya Janata Party. While hearing Chadha's petition, which accused misuse of his image and persona on social media, Justice Prasad stated that the posts were related to critiques of decisions made in the political arena. On May 21, the court noted, 'There is a fine line between defamation and criticism. My initial thought was that, prima facie, there was no violation of personality rights. The criticism pertains to decisions made in the political sphere.'

Following Wednesday's order, Chadha's attorneys, Satty Anand and Nikhil Aradhy, expressed their approval of the ruling. They stated that it reinforced the notion that freedom of expression cannot be exploited as a pretext for orchestrating campaigns aimed at defaming individuals. Highlighting the significance of this ruling, the lawyers remarked that it represents a crucial step towards swiftly addressing organized online defamation and safeguarding the dignity of public discourse.

According to his lawyers, Chadha argued in court that a coordinated and allegedly paid social media campaign was being run through various professional agencies, aimed at damaging his public image and reputation. They asserted that evidence presented before the court indicated that numerous social media accounts and influencers had allegedly published content for payment through influencer marketing agencies. The lawyers also claimed that these posts were disseminated across multiple social media handles within minutes, suggesting a deliberate attempt to promote falsehoods and inflict irreparable harm to his reputation.