The Delhi High Court refused blanket interim protection to BJP MP Raghav Chadha in his personality rights suit over alleged AI-generated deepfakes and defamatory posts. The Court, however, ordered removal of five posts found prima facie defamatory while rejecting claims against other content.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, July 1, 2026, refused to grant a blanket interim injunction in favour of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Raghav Chadha in his lawsuit alleging circulation of AI-generated deepfakes, manipulated videos, synthetic content and defamatory social media posts targeting him after his political transition from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to the BJP.
Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that, at this preliminary stage, the material placed before the Court did not indicate a clear violation of Chadha’s personality rights. However, after examining the objectionable content identified by the MP, the Court directed the removal of five posts which it found to be prima facie defamatory.
The judge said,
“I have ordered the removal of 5 documents. Rest of the content is not defamatory,”
The Court declined to issue a wider direction for removal of all disputed content, holding that the remaining material did not warrant immediate intervention.
Factual Background and Arguments
The matter arose from a suit filed by Chadha seeking protection against allegedly fabricated digital content, including AI-generated deepfake videos, manipulated photographs, cloned voice recordings, morphed visuals and fake speeches circulated on social media platforms.
The dispute gained attention after Chadha, who was nominated to the Rajya Sabha on an AAP ticket, joined the BJP in April 2026. Following the political development, several digitally altered images and videos allegedly surfaced online.
During the hearing, Chadha’s lawyers pointed out that certain images showed him wearing a saree and another depiction showed Prime Minister Narendra Modi allegedly showering money on him. The petitioner argued that such content was not merely criticism but defamatory material suggesting that he had compromised his political position for financial benefit.
Representing Chadha, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar argued that the posts were offensive, defamatory and targeted his client’s reputation by portraying him in a false and humiliating manner. The petition was filed through advocates Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe.
Observations of the High Court
However, the Court drew a distinction between personality rights and defamation. Justice Prasad observed that the allegations raised by Chadha appeared, at first glance, to be more closely related to political criticism and defamation rather than a violation of personality rights.
While hearing arguments on the interim injunction application earlier on May 21, the Court had indicated that the disputed content did not prima facie establish infringement of personality rights.
The Court had observed,
“See, the point is this, sir. The first impression in my mind. Prima facie, there is no personality right involved in this case. A decision taken by you in a political arena is being criticised… Undoubtedly, right from independence, we have grown up seeing RK Laxman’s cartoons. The way criticisms are made of decisions taken. Probably at that time, social media had not gone to that extent. Now it has gone to a greater extent,”
Justice Prasad also questioned whether political figures could seek protection against every form of criticism arising from their public decisions.
The Court remarked,
“At the end of the day, it’s still within the realm of a comment by a person. Please understand. A comment by a person criticising a political decision from where does… When you look at all these photographs… Please understand it is an attack or a critique… Please understand. As a political leader, can you be so sensitive?”
The judge noted that political leaders are often subjected to criticism and satire as part of public discourse, though such criticism cannot cross the boundaries of unlawful or defamatory content.
The Court further indicated that since many of the accounts or individuals responsible for the alleged posts were unidentified, it may consider appointing an amicus curiae to assist in the matter.
Despite the Court’s observations, Chadha’s counsel pressed for interim protection, leading the Court to examine the disputed content in detail before passing its order.
ALSO READ: Election Void for Non-Disclosure of Criminal Conviction: Supreme Court| Analysis
Ultimately, Justice Prasad directed the removal of five specific posts while refusing to grant a broader order restraining all disputed material. The remaining claims will be considered during further proceedings in the suit.
Raghav Chadha Joining BJP
Chadha, a well-known young leader in the AAP and a close associate of Arvind Kejriwal, resigned from the party and joined the BJP in April 2026. He did so along with several other AAP Rajya Sabha MPs.
Chadha had been linked with AAP from its early days following the India Against Corruption movement. Within the party, he gradually built his profile as a strategist and spokesperson, and later emerged as a prominent national figure. He eventually became a Rajya Sabha MP from Punjab and was widely regarded as one of the leading voices in Parliament, particularly in support of AAP’s policies and leadership. Over time, however, reports of growing differences between Chadha and parts of the party leadership fueled speculation about his future in politics.
The shift was confirmed when Chadha and other AAP Rajya Sabha members moved to the BJP. Chadha stated that he felt AAP had drifted away from its founding principles, adding that his decision was driven by political and ideological considerations. Analysts described the development as a blow to AAP, since Chadha was seen as part of the party’s younger leadership cohort.
AAP leaders reacted sharply, accusing the BJP of trying to undermine the party by drawing away its elected representatives. BJP leaders, on the other hand, welcomed Chadha’s entry and framed it as evidence of increasing support for the BJP leadership. This development also altered the political balance in the Rajya Sabha and heightened the contest between the two parties.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE