Balkrishna's plea to remove online content 'too broad': Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court told Acharya Balkrishna his plea to remove online content is too broad. A judge stated public figures must accept criticism and satire, and the court cannot pass blanket orders to take down material without specific review.

The Delhi High Court on Monday asked Acharya Balkrishna to narrow down his request for the removal of online content, observing that the plea was too broad and could not be allowed in its present form.

Public Figures Must Be Open to Criticism: Court

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that a public figure must be open to criticism, satire, and commentary, and the Court cannot pass blanket orders to take down content without examining specific instances.

Balkrishna has filed a suit alleging misuse of his personality rights through deepfake videos and other manipulated digital content. His counsel argued that such content could mislead his large and diverse audience, especially people in rural areas who may not have the digital awareness to identify fake material. It was submitted that this creates a risk of confusion and reputational harm.

Court Questions Scope of Takedown Request

However, the Court raised concerns over the list of links placed on record, noting that it also included news reports from well-known media organisations which are not parties to the case. The judge questioned whether such content could be removed without hearing the publishers. The Court also said it cannot pass general or "omnibus" directions against unidentified parties and noted that some of the content listed included satire and caricatures, which public figures are expected to tolerate.

In response, Balkrishna's counsel clarified that the plaintiff is not seeking the removal of content related to court proceedings, including material linked to Supreme Court judgements. This statement was recorded by the Court.

Plaintiff Directed to Revise Takedown Request

The High Court directed the plaintiff to file a revised list clearly identifying the specific content that allegedly violates his personality rights. The matter has been adjourned and will be heard again on Tuesday.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)