The Bombay High Court has emphasized that social media access does not grant individuals the right to publish potentially defamatory content, regardless of whether the target is a private individual or a celebrity. This observation emerged during a legal dispute involving Bollywood actor Salman Khan and his neighbor, Ketan Kakkad, concerning a property disagreement in Panvel, as documented in Salman Khan v. Ketan Kakkad & Ors.
This matter was presided over by Justice Sharmila Deshmukh, who heard Khan’s appeal against a civil court’s decision that denied him interim relief in a defamation suit he filed against Kakkad. The suit arose from Kakkad’s tweets and YouTube videos related to the property dispute.
Justice Deshmukh expressed that disputes should not be aired on social media platforms but rather resolved through proper legal channels. She also advised Kakkad to consider removing the contentious tweets and videos. The judge highlighted that judicial resources should not be consumed by debates over the presence of such online content. Even if third parties uploaded the material, steps can be taken to have it removed via intermediaries.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for July 6. The dispute involves properties adjacent to each other in Panvel, where Salman Khan owns a farmhouse. Kakkad has accused Khan of breaching environmental regulations and obstructing access to his property. Despite approaching authorities, Kakkad claims no action was taken.
In response to these allegations, Kakkad used social media and YouTube interviews to voice his grievances, prompting Salman Khan to file a defamation suit. Khan argues that Kakkad’s posts are not only defamatory but also incite communal tension. The content in question has reportedly attracted considerable online attention.
More Read
The defamation suit names various social media platforms, such as Facebook, X, Google, and YouTube, as defendants. Khan asserts that Kakkad’s allegations followed the cancellation of a proposed land transaction by authorities, which involved a plot next to Khan’s farmhouse. Kakkad allegedly accused Khan of orchestrating this cancellation.
Kakkad has contested the defamation claims, maintaining that his statements are factual and pertain to Khan’s property, thus not constituting defamation. He further argues that as a public figure, Khan has made his property details publicly available.
Legal representation for Khan includes Advocates Chirag Mody, Parag Khandhar, Chandrima Mitra, Tapan Radkar, and Zara Dhanboora from DSK Legal. Advocates Abha Singh and Aditya Pratap Singh are representing Kakkad.
