The Delhi High Court has clarified that criticism of political decisions made by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Parliament (MP) Raghav Chadha does not infringe upon his personality rights. The Court stated that Chadha could pursue a defamation suit if he believed such criticism was damaging. Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the material presented by Chadha did not prima facie indicate any breach of personality rights.
Justice Prasad addressed Chadha’s legal representative, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, questioning whether a political leader should be highly sensitive to public criticism. He remarked, “At the end of the day, it’s still within the realm of a comment by a person. Please understand. A comment by a person criticising a political decision from where does… When you look at all these photographs… Please understand it is an attack or a critique… Please understand. As a political leader, can you be so sensitive?”
Chadha had approached the Court seeking an injunction against the dissemination of AI-generated deepfakes, manipulated videos, synthetic voice cloning, morphed visuals, fabricated speeches, and deceptive digital content circulating on social media platforms. These digital manipulations emerged following his recent political transition from the Aam Aadmi Party to the Bharatiya Janata Party. Nayar highlighted instances where Chadha was depicted in a saree and shown receiving money from the Prime Minister in manipulated images.
Justice Prasad queried whether these actions constituted a violation of personality rights and emphasized that the current suit was not a defamation claim. He advised Nayar, “Please come to your prayers. It is not a defamation suit. It is a suit on the basis of a personality right.” In response, Nayar affirmed, “It is defamation,” to which the Court suggested filing an application to amend the suit.
The Court indicated willingness to register the plaint but stressed the need to hear the opposing side for any relief. With no other party present, Justice Prasad suggested appointing an amicus curiae. Nayar pressed for interim relief, arguing that the contentious content was profane and suggested Chadha had “sold himself for money.” The Court reserved its judgment on the interim relief plea.
More Read
Chadha’s legal team included advocates Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe. The case joins a broader trend of public figures, including actors Anil Kapoor and Amitabh Bachchan, securing injunctions to protect their personality rights against unauthorized use of their image and AI-generated content. Similarly, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor recently had his personality rights upheld by the High Court.
The ongoing discourse underscores the challenges of balancing freedom of expression with protection against digital misrepresentation in the age of social media proliferation. The legal proceedings in Chadha’s case continue to be closely monitored.
