The Delhi High Court on Thursday reserved its order on a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Raghav Chadha seeking removal of allegedly defamatory social media posts claiming that he had traded integrity for financial gain after joining the BJP.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad orally observed during the hearing that the impugned content prima facie appeared to be a criticism of Chadha’s political decision rather than a violation of his personality rights. The Court noted that the distinction between criticism and defamation was often exceedingly narrow.
At the outset, the Court told Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Chadha, that the case did not prima facie involve personality rights. The statements did not constitute a personal attack, but were rather standard commentary criticising a politician’s public decisions, it noted.
Referring to the photographs objected to by Chadha, the Court further remarked that the posts appeared to be a hostile review or a standard critique and asked the counsel to confine arguments to the reliefs sought. The single-judge Bench distinguished the action, noting that the petitioner’s claims were grounded strictly in the enforcement of personality rights as opposed to a plea for defamation.
Nayar submitted that Chadha was currently pressing only for interim relief against the allegedly defamatory posts. However, the Court reiterated that the material prima facie amounted to criticism of a political decision.
Arguing that the allegations crossed the line, Nayar contended that accusing his client of trading political loyalty for money could not be dismissed as mere criticism. However, the Court countered that whether these statements constituted defamation remained open to debate and may not warrant an immediate interim injunction. Noting that this was a debatable issue, the Bench deemed it fit to ppoint an amicus in the matter.
As the request for interim relief continued, the High Court distinguished between misuse of personality rights for commercial purposes and criticism directed at public figures. Referring to the earlier ruling related to the personality rights case of Congress leader Shashi Tharoor, the Court observed that the case was related to Tharoor’s speaking style and public persona. The Court eventually reserved orders on interim relief.
Chadha has sought a John Doe injunction against unidentified persons as well as named defendants, seeking restraint on the unauthorised use of his photographs and personal attributes without consent. The suit has been filed through Advocates Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe.
The High Court had previously passed orders protecting the personality rights of several public figures, including Tharoor, Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, entrepreneur Aman Gupta, actors Allu Arjun, Mohanlal, Kajol Devgan, R Madhavan, NTR Junior and Salman Khan, singer Jubin Nautiyal, former cricketer Sunil Gavaskar, spiritual leader Aniruddhacharya, and filmmaker Karan Johar.
The Court has also granted similar protection to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, journalist Sudhir Chaudhary, and podcaster Raj Shamani in cases involving alleged misuse of their likeness, including AI-generated and misleading online content.
The post Delhi High Court refuses interim relief to Raghav Chadha over posts criticising his shift to BJP appeared first on India Legal.