Sexually suggestive language not free speech: Delhi HC orders takedown of posts against Gaurav Bhatia

The court, however, refrained from issuing an ex-parte injunction against all such posts, including ones which the court deemed to be satirical in nature and that Bhatia has taken objection to. Justice Bansal reiterated, “The threshold for defamation in respect of public figures or politically exposed persons should be higher”.

In the order dated September 25, Justice Bansal recorded, “… while the words used in the impugned posts may appear to be defamatory by themselves, it has to be borne in mind that the impugned posts were occasioned on account of the plaintiff’s appearance, as noted above, during a live telecast and, on a prima facie view, appear to be satirical, humorous and in the nature of hyperbole.”

“Further, there is no invasion of privacy of the plaintiff as he voluntarily chose to be a part of a live television debate from his place of residence in such an attire… In my prima facie view, the threshold for defamation in respect of public figures or politically exposed persons should be higher. No doubt the actions of such individuals are more often under scrutiny and prone to public criticism, however, they also have the benefit of a stage/media as well as the ability to counter any statement made against him,” it said.

Taking objection to posts on social media where “defamatory statements” were being made against him, Bhatia had claimed an “invasion of privacy”. He submitted that the purported objectionable video, where he is improperly dressed, is being circulated “without my consent”. He said the video was from September 12, when he was at home.

The order recorded, “… at this stage, the court is not inclined to grant an ex-parte ad interim injunction against the defendants qua their respective posts. In my prima facie view, it would only be reasonable to give an opportunity to the defendants to present their case including the defence of ‘fair comment’ that they might take in support of their posts.”

The court has issued summons to the defendants and posted the matter for consideration next on November 19.