The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ordered the removal of six social media posts targeting BJP Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha, and that politicians should take political humour and satire and criticism seriously as part of the public life.
Justice Subramonium Prasad gave an interim order, saying that jokes and satire on political alliances, governance and public policies are part and parcel of democratic discourse and do not automatically constitute defamation.
Court Draws Line Between Satire and Harmful Content
The issue came to light after Chadha, who recently left AAP to join the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), approached the High Court seeking the removal of several social media posts that he described as malicious, fabricated and damaging to his reputation.
He claimed artificial intelligence (AI) and deepfake technology had been used to create misleading content that infringed upon his personality rights and harmed his public image. And, yet, the court ruled that the case did not, at first glance, carry personality rights.
"I said there are no personality rights involved. But I have asked to take down certain content," Justice Prasad said as he read out the order.
Only 6 of 52 Posts Were Ordered to Be Removed
Chadha flagged 52 social media posts and wanted them removed immediately.
After going over the material, the High Court directed the removal of six posts, but did not intervene with the remaining content. The court found that the rest of the posts were not prima facie defamatory, pointing out that criticism and humour directed at political figures are protected forms of expression in a democracy.
"Public figures should not be thin-skinned."
In a significant observation, the High Court said public representatives should be prepared to face criticism and satire. The court observed that "a public figure should not be so thin-skinned" as to object to every critical or humorous comment about political decisions.
It also said criticism of political choices should be treated with humility as it is with public interest in mind. AI Deepfakes Not Protected if They Harm Dignity
But it also said that it would not condone the use of AI-generated deepfakes that threaten a person's dignity; however, it is open to free speech and political satire.
The judge stressed that courts must strike a balance between protecting freedom of expression and safeguarding personal dignity where manipulated content crosses legal boundaries.
There is increasing legal battle over AI content.
Chadha said AI-generated and deepfake content had been widely circulated on social media platforms after his political switch, hurting his reputation. The case is only one of a growing number of legal disputes involving AI content creators and personality rights.
Previously, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, and Salman Khan had also approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection against the unauthorised use of their images and identities online, and got interim relief in their respective cases.
The new order shows that in the fight for free speech and political satire and the protection of citizens from harmful AI-generated content, it is a judiciary that is working hard to weigh what people think is in their best interest.
