Delhi Court Directs YouTube to Take Down Allegedly Defamatory Video Targeting Late Spiritual Leader
A Delhi court has issued an interim order mandating the removal of a YouTube video that contains serious allegations against the late spiritual leader Nirmal Singh Maharaj, widely known as "Chattarpur waale guruji." The video, which accuses the spiritual figure of fraud, cheating, and sexual assault, has been deemed prima facie defamatory by the judicial authorities.
Court's Ruling on Reputation and Digital Harm
District Judge Sachin Mittal, in a recent ad interim ex parte order, emphasized that the content uploaded by the digital channel 'Molitics' is capable of causing irreparable harm to the reputation of Guruji Ka Ashram Trust, its trustees, and devotees. The court firmly stated that defamation constitutes an injury to a person's reputation, affirming that every individual possesses the fundamental right to preserve their good name.
The judicial observation highlighted the viral nature of digital content, noting that the impugned 17-minute video can be accessed by anyone globally and shared to thousands with minimal effort. This rapid dissemination potential underscores the urgency of the court's directive.
Immediate Actions and Legal Restraints
In response to these concerns, the court has ordered YouTube and its operators to remove the controversial video within two days. Additionally, it has imposed a restraint on the video's creators and all other parties from publishing or circulating any similar defamatory material until the next hearing, scheduled for February 26.
The order stems from a civil suit filed by Guruji Ka Ashram Trust, which manages the spiritual institution founded by Singh. Representing the trust, lawyers argued that the video employs scurrilous expressions designed to malign the reputation of Guruji and his extensive global following.
Trust's Plea Against Digital Defamation
The legal representatives further submitted that the defamatory content was being repeatedly uploaded by various entities across multiple digital platforms. They warned that by the time remedial measures could be implemented, the material would likely have circulated widely and accumulated lakhs of views, exacerbating the damage.
To combat this unchecked spread, the trust sought a John Doe injunction, a court order aimed at restraining unidentified entities from perpetuating acts of defamation. This legal mechanism is crucial for curbing the rapid and uncontrolled dissemination of harmful content in the digital age.
The court took serious note of the trust's submission, which pointed out that the video used highly disparaging terms such as "loot," "thagi," "fraud baba," and "balatkaar." These allegations, if left unaddressed, could severely tarnish the legacy of the spiritual leader and the institution he founded.
This case highlights the growing judicial scrutiny over digital content and its potential to harm reputations, setting a precedent for how courts in India are addressing defamation in the era of social media and online platforms.
