The Delhi High Court has reserved its decision regarding the interim relief sought by Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha. This follows Chadha’s claims of supposed misuse of his personality rights through AI-generated deepfakes, altered visuals, and manipulated social media content. The case was presided over by Justice Subramonium Prasad, who noted during the proceedings that the material presented appeared to serve as political criticism rather than a clear-cut violation of personality rights.

Justice Prasad further elaborated that political figures have long been subjects of satire and criticism, suggesting that such discourse forms a part of public life. He referred to historical instances, mentioning the renowned cartoons by RK Laxman, which have commented on political events over decades. The judge acknowledged that while the mediums may have evolved with the advent of social media, the essence of political commentary remains.

Debate Over Criticism Versus Defamation

In representation for Chadha, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar contended that certain online posts transcended legitimate political critique, crossing into defamatory territory. He argued that these posts portray Chadha as a figure who has switched political allegiances for financial gain, depicting him in compromising images. This was coupled with claims that such representations have a damaging effect on Chadha’s reputation.

The Court expressed apprehensions about whether restrictions could be placed on criticism aimed at political leaders, especially regarding their public decisions. Nayar insisted that the remarks amount to defamation and therefore warrant legal recourse. He asserted that accusations suggesting Chadha’s pursuit of money are beyond the bounds of fair criticism.

At one point in the proceedings, Justice Prasad floated the idea of appointing an amicus curiae. This would aid the Court in addressing the broader legal implications of balancing free speech with the protection of individual dignity, particularly in the context of artificial intelligence and social media platforms. The judge pointed out that distinguishing between defamation and criticism is notably challenging, underlining that free speech rights should not infringe upon one’s right to live with dignity.

Responses from Legal Counsel

Counsel for Meta, the parent company of Facebook, defended the content under scrutiny. They argued that many of the screenshots referenced by Chadha were merely newspaper articles and should be considered benign material. The defence also sought to clarify the nature of the discussions surrounding this case, emphasising that the arguments presented must be contextualised within the broader public discourse on freedom of expression.

Following an extensive exchange of arguments, the Bench decided to reserve its order on the motion for interim relief. Chadha’s petition seeks to prevent the unauthorised use of his image, likeness, voice, and identity via artificial intelligence and digital manipulation. The claim encompasses demands for legal restrictions against the creation and spread of allegedly deceptive content across social media.

Furthermore, Chadha has previously represented the Rajinder Nagar constituency as an MLA between 2020 and 2022. Having long been affiliated with the Aam Aadmi Party, he transitioned to the Bharatiya Janata Party in April 2026. This case contributes to a growing body of legal actions being brought before the Delhi High Court concerning the rights of public personalities in the context of artificial intelligence. Notable figures such as Anil Kapoor and Amitabh Bachchan have similarly sought legal protection against the unauthorised usage of their identities and likenesses.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share