The Delhi High Court on Thursday, September 25, 2025, announced that it would pass an interim injunction order directing the removal of allegedly defamatory posts circulating on social media concerning Senior Advocate and BJP leader Gaurav Bhatia. These posts pertain to a video of Bhatia’s recent participation in a television debate, which went viral and attracted widespread public attention.
During the hearing, Justice Amit Bansal observed:
“We will take take down of the offensive videos. If not taken down, you will inform them and they will take down.”
Bhatia, appearing in person alongside Advocate Raghav Awasthi, drew the Court’s attention to the nature of the posts. He submitted that the defendants continued to circulate the same content even after the proceedings. Bhatia emphasized the seriousness of the matter:
“Please see this picture and title. Defendants who are party in the suit… your lordships may have an order. Same defendants are posting same remarks…, after the hearing. They are aware.”
Bhatia further argued that the posts could not be defended under the banner of freedom of speech or satire, as they directly harmed his reputation, which he had built over many years.
The defamation suit names 22 defendants, including prominent political and media entities such as:
• Samajwadi Party Media Cell, Abhisar Sharma, Ragini Nayak, Saurabh Bhardwaj
• Social media handles like Mohit Chauhan, Ranting Gola, Manoj Yadav, Manoj Singh Kaka, Manish Tiwari, Sandeep Singh, Roshan Rai, Swanaamdhanya, Rajkumar Bhati, Rofl Gandhi, Bolta Hindustan, Wg Dr. Anuma Acharya, Surendra Rajput, Srinivas
• Media platforms including Newslaundry, News18, Google India, and five YouTube videos
During the hearing, Advocate Mamta Rani, representing Google, submitted that the Court could specify email IDs for notice purposes and clarified that Basic Subscriber Information (BSI) was not necessary since sufficient details were already available regarding the online content.
The incident in question occurred on September 12, 2025, during Bhatia’s live appearance on a News18 television debate. The camera inadvertently captured him sitting in kurta and shorts inside his home. Bhatia and his counsel submitted that the viral posts and images were a violation of his privacy, as they were recorded in the privacy of his residence.
Advocate Awasthi highlighted that the posts were particularly objectionable due to the use of sexually explicit references, such as “male private parts” and the word “toti,” specifically in the post by the Samajwadi Party Media Cell. He argued that such language is completely unacceptable in public discourse and cannot be excused as satire or humor.
Bhatia, appearing in person, also addressed the Court directly, noting that while he acknowledged the Court’s remark about public figures needing to be “thick-skinned,” the posts were made by irresponsible individuals claiming to be media houses, and therefore warranted judicial intervention.
During the previous hearing, the Court had already indicated that while some posts might fall under satirical commentary or humor, those posts containing obscene or sexually explicit references, particularly regarding male anatomy, would likely be injuncted. The Court emphasized the need to balance freedom of speech with protection of individual reputation and privacy in accordance with Indian defamation and IT law.
The interim order sought by Bhatia is expected to mandate the takedown of all offensive videos and posts across platforms including X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube, ensuring that the content does not continue to harm his reputation during the pendency of the suit.
Case Title: Gaurav Bhatia v. Samajwadi Party Media Cell & Ors.
Case Number: CS(OS)-679/2025
