The Delhi High Court is set to scrutinize the potential misuse of personality rights claims, particularly when they are employed to hinder the distribution of information about misconduct or to suppress satire and parody under the guise of publicity rights. This was highlighted in the case Alakh Pandey v John Doe(s) and Ors, where Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani assessed a lawsuit initiated by Alakh Pandey, the founder of PhysicsWallah, aiming to safeguard his personality rights.
Justice Bhambhani emphasized that the court’s responsibility includes ensuring that such legal instruments are not misappropriated to secure orders for the removal of content that is legally permissible. The court noted that Pandey’s assertion of personality rights appeared to be excessively broad.
Referencing a prior judgment in DM Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Baby Gift House and Others, Justice Bhambhani stated, “This court intends to verify that personality rights are not utilized to block the dissemination of information regarding wrongdoing, nor to erase an entire category of expression like caricature, lampooning, or parody that might not involve commercial exploitation of an individual’s personality or publicity rights.”
In an interim order dated August 5, the court limited takedown requests to three specific violations: content deemed obscene, derogatory, and involving unauthorized commercial use or impersonation of Pandey’s personality traits. The court also issued summons to the defendants accused of posting objectionable material and requested their responses.
Moreover, the court instructed Google, Telegram, X, and Automatic Inc to provide basic subscriber information (BSI) for those managing the flagged websites. Pandey was given the liberty to contact relevant intermediaries upon discovering any additional infringing sites. These intermediaries, including Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Domain Name Registrars (DNRs), are tasked with technically verifying the claims made.
More Read
The court clarified that the role of ISPs and DNRs is restricted to the technical verification of whether the site in question is indeed a rogue site, not to decide whether to block it. The court instructed that if the flagged websites are confirmed as rogue, the ISPs and DNRs must enforce the ex-parte ad-interim injunction granted.
The court expressed confidence that Pandey would not misuse the court’s directions, noting, “This court does not discern any real risk that the plaintiff would misuse the direction granted by this court.”
Representing Pandey, Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak pointed out instances of obscene and derogatory content targeting his client and highlighted unauthorized commercial exploitation of Pandey’s personality traits. “Telegram stickers are being sold using my face for commercial purposes, which could damage my reputation among students,” Deepak argued, citing further that the content was “commercial, unauthorized, and obscene.”
More Read
Deepak also flagged cases of impersonation, including a Telegram channel titled ‘Alakh Sir lectures’ and fake social media profiles using Pandey’s name. A satirical video on Pandey was also shown in court, but after viewing the clip, the court declined to issue a takedown order for the video.
Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, along with Mohit Goel, Abhishek Kotnala, Kartikeya Tandon, Urvashi Singh, M Mazumndar, and Sidhi Pramod R, appeared on behalf of Pandey. Advocates Aditya Gupta, Vani Kaushik, and Sunidhi Agrahari represented Google. Government counsel Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Manisha Agrawal Narein, Bhawna, and Nipun Jain, along with advocates Ayush Kasana, Kushi, and Shikha Yadav, appeared for the Department of Telecommunications and the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology.
