Shivani Gadhavi
Published On: February 17, 2022 at 17:44 IST
The Delhi High Court on February 16, 2022 observed that an Interim Injunction cannot be granted in matters wherein social media is used as medium of expression by people, just because of wider viewership of the content that is posted on social media platforms.
The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Asha Menon was hearing a Petition filed by FIITJEE Limited in order to seek an Ex-Parte Interim Injunction against the Respondents vis-a-vis Vidya Mandir Classes Limited. The Petitioners sought to take down videos posted by the Respondents on YouTube, which were about the Petitioners, delivering malicious and defamatory content.
The Petitioners Alleged that in one of the videos posted by the Respondents, the Respondents were explaining the battle between Lord Ram and Ravan, wherein a comparison was made by the Respondents that FITJEE Limited was in position of Ravan. It was also Alleged by the Petitioners that the Respondents Accused them of Extortion, Kidnapping and misleading students.
The High Court Bench while citing the case of Tata Sons Limited V. Greenpeace International stated that, “wider viewership or a degree of permanence characteristic of publication on the internet would not change the essential fact that it too is but a medium of expression and calls for no different standards for grant of interlocutory Injunction.”
The High Court Bench while observing the Accusations made by the Respondents stated that, “to Accuse someone of Kidnapping, Extortion etc. is different. Use of such strong words is inappropriate to say the least. It directly impacts the parent who would be discouraged with such negative description of the Plaintiff. These words Ex Facie are untrue.”
The High Court Bench therefore, concluded that, “this Court is of the considered view that the Defendants will have to take down the aforementioned sentences in the video and ensure that no version with such content is in circulation, depicting the Plaintiff as a set of Criminals.”
However, the High Court while disposing of the Petition, was of the opinion that the offensive sentences used in the videos should be taken down and that the Petitioners are entitled to no Compensation.