Delhi High Court: Gaurav Bhatia defamation case: Delhi HC asks CJP members if they will voluntarily take down posts | Delhi News
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Thursday asked the defendants in a defamation case filed by senior advocate and BJP leader Gaurav Bhatia whether they were willing to voluntarily remove the disputed social media posts.The court observed that there were different ways to protest and that criticism should be expressed in a more articulate manner.Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made the observations while hearing Bhatia’s Rs 2-crore defamation suit against Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka, Abhijeet Dipke and others. Bhatia appeared in person, according to news agency ANI.During the hearing, the Court questioned the inclusion of Abhijeet Dipke as a defendant and asked what material had been posted by him. Counsel for Dipke submitted that there was not a single tweet by him forming the subject matter of the dispute and that the prayers in the suit were essentially against defendants Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka.The Court observed that there appeared to be “nothing against him” and indicated that Dipke could be removed as a party.The court also asked counsel appearing for the other defendants to take instructions on whether they were willing to voluntarily remove the disputed posts.“There are different ways of protesting. You are all youngsters. You may have anxieties. But attacking like this without verifying is not correct,” the Court observed.The Court said it did not want to pass a takedown order at this stage if the defendants were willing to remove the content on their own.Counsel for Das submitted that the tweet in question had already been deleted.The Court, however, pointed out that another post had also been put up. “You have the right to express, but sometimes expressions need to be put in a more articulate manner, so that intention goes in the right way,” the Court observed.The judge also told Bhatia that there could be other ways of addressing the issue and observed that he could have approached the defendants before moving the court.Bhatia submitted that the case involved aggravated defamation and argued that the disputed posts should not remain online as the defendants had a large number of followers. He said the posts were damaging his reputation and that he had given the defendants an opportunity to remove the content.Bhatia further alleged that his photograph had been used alongside a fabricated statement and that the logo of a news agency had been included in the graphic, giving the content an appearance of credibility.The Court questioned Bhatia about how Dipke and the CJP had been made parties to the proceedings and what specific acts were attributed to them.Bhatia said the suit copy had also been served on X.The Court reiterated that defendants Nos. 1 and 2, namely Das and Ranka, were the persons against whom the immediate allegations had been made and asked them to take instructions.The Court further advised the young defendants that they had many things ahead of them, including studies and other work, and questioned why they should spend their time litigating in court.The matter was thereafter passed over, with the defendants being asked to take instructions and return to the Court.Bhatia has filed the suit seeking Rs 2 crore in damages, along with permanent and mandatory injunctions, over allegedly defamatory content circulated on social media platform X.According to the plaint, the immediate dispute relates to an AI-generated graphic which allegedly carried Bhatia’s photograph and attributed remarks concerning Swatantra Bhardwaj to him.Bhatia has denied making the alleged remarks. The plaint states that the disputed post was viewed by more than 1.32 lakh people and was subsequently deleted after Bhatia objected to it.The suit alleges that Das and Ranka published or amplified the disputed material and that Bhatia’s photograph was used alongside the alleged statement, creating a false impression that he was its source. Bhatia has claimed that the circulation of the content caused reputational damage.(With agency inputs)
