The Delhi High Court on Thursday (September 10) orally observed that posts made by Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka against BJP leader and senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, without verification, were “not correct” and suggested that they voluntarily take down the posts.
The Bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela was hearing a Rs 2 crore defamation suit filed by Bhatia against CJP’s Abhijit Dipke, Das and Ranka.
Bhatia has challenged a post published by Das and Ranka on X (formerly Twitter) on September 5, following the arrest of right-wing influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj, who has been accused of assaulting a teenage CJP protester during protests at Jantar Mantar.
According to Bhatia’s suit, the post was an AI-generated tweet falsely attributing to him remarks describing Bhardwaj as “dimagi naxali” and “jaatiwaadi.” Bhatia contends that the defendants falsely represented that he had made statements which he had never made, using his photograph alongside the purported statement.
At the outset, the Court noted that there appeared to be no allegation against Dipke. His counsel, Advocate Nakul Gandhi, therefore sought his deletion from the array of parties.
The Court noted that while youth may hold valid concerns and have various means to protest, launching unverified allegations against individuals crosses the line of proper conduct.
The Court suggested that Das and Ranka voluntarily remove the posts and file their replies, stating that it did not want to pass a mandatory takedown order if the defendants were willing to act on their own.
Even though Das’s counsel confirmed the initial tweet had been taken down, the Court highlighted another problematic post. Emphasizing that effective free speech requires care, the Court advised that expressions should be articulated clearly to convey the right, intentadding reassuringly that it understood their youth and anxieties from experience.
The Court also told Bhatia that there were other ways of resolving the dispute, including approaching the defendants directly instead of immediately moving the Court.
Bhatia, however, argued that the matter involved “aggravated defamation”, stressing that the posts had been circulated to millions of followers and were damaging his reputation. He said he had given the defendants an opportunity to address the issue.
Noting that Das and Ranka were the parties responsible for the posts, the Court directed their counsel to check if they would voluntarily take them down.
Bhatia also alleged that the defendants had forged his photograph and used the logo of a news agency to lend credibility to the allegedly fake content.
When the Court questioned how Dipke and the CJP had been made parties, his counsel submitted that there was not a single tweet by Dipke and that the prayers in the suit were directed only against Das and Ranka. Bhatia, however, argued that the alleged posts were part of a broader “ecosystem” targeting individuals who raised objections to such content.
After reiterating its advice for the defendants to voluntarily take down the posts, the Court asked their counsel to get instructions, noting that as young people with long careers ahead, they should avoid spending their time in litigation.
Bhatia’s suit alleges that Das and Ranka did not merely criticise or disagree with any statement actually made by him, but falsely attributed statements to him and disseminated them publicly. The suit states that the impugned material was accompanied by Bhatia’s photograph and a purported statement, allegedly creating a false nexus between him and the words circulated online.
The Rs 2 crore suit further alleges that CJP and its leaders have repeatedly made public comments concerning the judiciary that, according to Bhatia, go beyond fair criticism and are calculated to lower the dignity, authority and institutional standing of the judiciary.
Bhatia has particularly referred to Das’ criticism of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma over her decision not to recuse herself from hearing the CBI’s challenge to the discharge of AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal and others in the Delhi excise policy case.
He has also cited Das’ posts concerning the incarceration of Umar Khalid, an accused in the larger conspiracy case arising out of the 2020 Delhi riots.
According to the suit, Das, who describes himself as Chief Spokesperson/Co-convenor of an unregistered collective, has allegedly used social media to attack judicial institutions in a manner that goes beyond criticism of specific judicial orders.
Bhatia has further alleged that the CJP, while claiming to have “no political links” and to be pursuing a cause “bigger than any party”, has systematically used social media to criticise and attack the judiciary, including through allegedly pejorative comparisons involving judicial processes and outcomes. The matter was passed over after the Court directed counsel for Das and Ranka to take instructions on voluntary removal of the posts.
The post Delhi High Court urges CJP leaders to take down unverified posts against BJP leader and senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia appeared first on India Legal.