Delhi HC gets CJP leaders to pull down AI posts against BJP's Gaurav Bhatia, declines wider injunction

The Delhi High Court on Thursday persuaded two Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders to take down AI-generated social media posts targeting BJP leader and senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, but stopped short of granting him a wider “dynamic injunction”, observing that criticism and even lampooning were part of public life while an individual remained entitled to protect his reputation.

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela recorded undertakings by CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka that the disputed posts would be removed during the day, after the Bench questioned whether political protest needed to cross into attributing statements to a person that he claimed never to have made.

The order came on Bhatia’s Rs 2-crore defamation suit against the CJP and its leaders over an AI-generated graphic that allegedly falsely attributed to him remarks concerning Swatantra Bhardwaj, who is accused of assaulting the father of CJP activist Nishu Azad.

The graphic claimed Bhatia had described Bhardwaj as a “dimagi naxal”. Bhatia denied making any such statement and demanded that the post be deleted and an unconditional apology issued.

During Thursday’s hearing, the Bench sought to cool the confrontation rather than immediately pass coercive directions against the young political activists.

There were different ways of registering a protest, the court told Das and Ranka, adding that while their “anxiety” could be understood, putting words of this nature in somebody else’s mouth may not be appropriate. Instead of directing them to remove the posts, the Bench asked whether they were willing to do so voluntarily.

Both agreed. Their counsel told the court that the posts would be taken down on Thursday itself, an undertaking that was recorded in the order.

But the court’s questions were not confined to the defendants. It also asked Bhatia whether every such social media dispute needed to be escalated into litigation, pointing out that public figures, and even courts, routinely face ridicule and criticism.

When Bhatia pressed the impact of social media posts that could potentially reach one or two million people, the Bench acknowledged his right to defend his reputation but observed that lampooning and harsh commentary were realities of public life.

The exchange assumed significance when Bhatia sought a dynamic injunction that could extend to identical or similar posts appearing subsequently.

The court was not persuaded to grant such sweeping relief at this stage. It pointed out that the proceedings were a defamation action, not an intellectual property dispute where dynamic injunctions are commonly sought, and said such an order could not be passed without hearing the defendants.

Bhatia argued that the controversy was continuing even while the case was being heard, claiming Das had posted about him within minutes of the court asking whether the disputed material could be removed.

The Bench nevertheless declined to issue the wider injunction for now. It instead gave Bhatia liberty to directly approach Meta and X if identical posts appear in future. The platforms may examine such requests and take appropriate action, the court said. If they find any impediment in removing the material, they can communicate it to Bhatia in writing, leaving him free to return to the High Court.

The court also issued summons to Das, Ranka and CJP founder Abhijit Dipke and directed them to respond to Bhatia’s defamation suit.

At the same time, Justice Gedela made it clear that the issuance of summons should not be read as the court drawing any conclusion against them at this stage.

“For the time being we want to make sure there is no acrimony on this issue,” the Bench observed, making clear that it was not presently imputing wrongdoing to any of the defendants.

Advocate Nakul Gandhi, appearing for Dipke, argued that his client had neither published nor reposted the disputed material and, therefore, no cause of action arose against him. The court also noted during the hearing that Dipke himself had not posted anything against Bhatia.

Das had originally shared the AI-generated graphic on X. After Bhatia publicly denied the purported remarks and demanded its removal, Das deleted the post and clarified that the graphic had been generated using AI, while questioning whether Bhatia disagreed with the sentiment attributed to him.

Ranka allegedly amplified the controversy by reposting the graphic with a caption mocking BJP leaders.