However, a single-judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad refused to pass any blanket interim order directing the removal of the remaining content or granting wider protection to Chadha's personality and publicity rights.
Holding that, prima facie, the dispute did not involve any violation of personality rights, Justice Prasad said, "There is no personality right involved. However, I have ordered a takedown of only five documents. Rest is not defamatory prima facie."
Chadha had moved the Delhi High Court seeking protection of his personality and publicity rights against the alleged unauthorised use and misuse of his name, image, likeness and identity across online and digital platforms, including through AI-generated, deepfake and morphed content.
The plea also sought directions for the removal of synthetic voice cloning, fabricated speeches and manipulated digital content allegedly circulated after his recent switch from the AAP to the BJP.
While reserving its order on the interim application in May, Justice Prasad had orally observed that, prima facie, the content flagged by Chadha appeared to be criticism of a political decision and did not disclose any violation of personality rights.
"Prima facie, there is no personality right involved in this case. A decision taken by you in a political arena is being criticised," the Delhi High Court had remarked during the hearing.
It had also observed that the distinction between criticism and defamation was "quite thin" and indicated that the present matter may not warrant an interim injunction on the basis of personality rights.
Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Chadha, had contended that certain posts went beyond criticism and were defamatory in nature, alleging that they falsely portrayed the MP as having "sold himself for money".
Referring to images depicting the Prime Minister showering Chadha with cash and other morphed visuals, Nayar had sought interim relief limited to the removal of such content, arguing that the material was profane and damaging to Chadha's reputation. However, the Delhi High Court had orally remarked that the issue raised appeared to fall within the domain of defamation rather than personality rights.
"It is not a defamation suit. It is a suit on the basis of personality rights," Justice Prasad had observed while suggesting that Chadha may seek amendment of the plaint if he intended to pursue defamation claims.
--IANS
pds/dpb
