Former Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has filed a defamation suit before the Bengaluru City Civil and Sessions Court seeking to restrain 42 media organisations, digital platforms and other defendants from publishing or circulating videos allegedly linking him to a honey-trap controversy.

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge B Pushpanjali on Monday reserved orders on Siddaramaiah’s application seeking the removal of the videos and a direction to prevent their further publication. The court will pronounce its order on October 13.

Siddaramaiah has sought a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from broadcasting, publishing or sharing two videos, along with clips, screenshots, transcripts and reports reproducing the allegations made in them. He has also sought directions to remove the videos and disable access to the content on digital platforms.

The suit names 42 defendants, including Freedom TV Kannada, the YouTube channel Karnataka Honey Trap, several Kannada and English newspapers and television news channels, WhatsApp, YouTube LLC, Google India, Yahoo India and Facebook India.

According to the plaint, the first video was uploaded by Karnataka Honey Trap on September 27 under the title “Karnataka Honey Trap Nexus Part 1”.

Siddaramaiah has alleged that the video and its caption sought to link him to allegations of blackmail, an alleged honey-trap network and political developments during his tenure as Chief Minister. The caption reportedly questioned whether he had been blackmailed and whether compromising material had played a role in his resignation earlier this year.

The former Chief Minister has denied the allegations, describing them as false and baseless and claiming that they were intended to damage his reputation and political standing.

The second publication was an hour-long programme streamed or uploaded by Freedom TV Kannada on October 2, 2026, under the title “LIVE: Biggest CD Blast in Karnataka Politics?”.

As per the plaint, the programme sensationalised the controversy by repeatedly referring to an alleged CD and suggesting the involvement of a prominent political leader without presenting independently verified material to substantiate the claims.

The suit also refers to a purported recording in which a woman allegedly claims that she was sexually exploited as a minor in or around 2011 and identifies Siddaramaiah as the person allegedly involved. According to the plaint, the recording surfaced publicly only in September this year, around 15 years after the alleged incident.

Siddaramaiah has contended that the material does not contain any contemporaneous complaint, independent witness statement or other independently verifiable evidence to substantiate the allegations. He has also questioned how the conversation was recorded and presented, alleging that the questioning was structured to elicit a particular narrative.

The plaint further alleges that the timing of the publications and the accompanying political commentary were intended to bring him into public disrepute.

Arguing for interim relief, Siddaramaiah has submitted that the continued availability of the videos could lead to their wider circulation through edited clips, screenshots and social media posts, causing irreparable damage to his reputation.

Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol appeared for the former Chief Minister. Advocates Shathabish Shivanna and Praveen Kamath filed the suit.