Nation

IIE Digital Desk:On Wednesday,The Delhi High Court had granted the partial relief to BJP Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chanda who has been directed by the removal of five social media has been posted and which was been found to be defamatory and containing obscene or explicit content. However the court who had refused to issue a blanket order protecting Chadha's personality rights, clarifying that the case primarily concerned defamation rather than the misuse of personality rights.

Subramonium Prasad is the justice who observed that only a limited number of posts crossed the threshold of acceptable political criticism. According to the court, the five identified posts were profane, vulgar, and exceeded the boundaries of satire and free speech. The remaining content, the judge said, did not appear defamatory at the preliminary stage and therefore did not warrant removal. 

Chadha had already been aproached to the high court  seeking the removal of allegedly false, AI-generated, deepfake, and manipulated social media content that claimed he had "sold himself for money" following his switch from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and argued that the posts damaged his reputation and violated his personality rights by using his photographs and identity without consent.

During earlier hearings in May, the High Court had already the remarked that public figures, especially politicians, are often subject to criticism and satire. Justice Prasad noted that there is a "thin line" between political criticism and defamation, emphasizing that the  freedom of speech must be balanced with an individual's right to dignity and reputation. These observations formed the basis of the court's final interim decision.

While declining to recognise a broader personality rights claim in this case, the court held that content which is explicitly abusive or defamatory cannot be protected under the guise of political commentary. The detailed order is awaited, but the interim ruling requires the removal of the five objectionable posts while allowing the remaining content to stay online. 

The case is among several recent legal disputes involving AI-generated and manipulated online content targeting public figures. As the use of artificial intelligence and deepfakes continues to grow, Indian courts are already increased to being called upon to define the legal boundaries between free expression, political criticism, and protection of personal reputation in the digital age.