The Allahabad High Court has ordered social media platforms to immediately remove all defamatory content targeting spiritual leader Swami Rambhadracharya. The court emphasized prompt action to protect reputation and uphold the principles of media responsibility.
The Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow Bench mandated prompt action in response to a petition addressing defamatory online content aimed at Padma Vibhushan awardee and spiritual leader Swami Ram Bhadracharya.
The court issued notices to Facebook India, Instagram India, Google, and YouTube, instructing their Grievance Redressal Officers to ensure the immediate removal of such content.
This order was given by Justice Sangeeta Chandra on September 17, 2025. The petition, submitted by eight disciples of the esteemed scholar, claimed that a Gorakhpur-based YouTuber, Shashank Shekhar of Bedhadak Khabar, uploaded a video titled “Rambhadracharya par Khulasa, 16 saal pahle kya hua tha” on August 29, 2025.
Also Read: What DY Chandrachud Said After CJI Gavai’s Subtle Dig Over Official Residence Row
This video, widely circulated on YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram, allegedly contained defamatory and insulting remarks against Swami Ji, who has been blind since birth but has received national acclaim for his contributions to literature, Sanskrit studies, and social service.
Swami Ram Bhadracharya, the Chancellor of Jagadguru Swami Ram Bhadracharya Divyang Vishwavidyalay in Chitrakoot, is a Padma Vibhushan awardee (2015) and was honored with the prestigious Gyanpeeth Award in 2025. His disciples argued that the derogatory content not only harmed his reputation but also disrespected the dignity of individuals with disabilities.
The petitioners sought various court directives, including invoking Section 98 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to penalize and ban such content.
They also called for enhancements to the grievance mechanisms of social media platforms and the creation of guidelines to prevent online discrimination against persons with disabilities.
Legal action was requested under several laws, including Sections 196, 197, 294, 295, 299, and 302 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 67A and 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 3 and 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women’s Act, 1986, and Sections 3, 7, and 92, along with powers under Sections 75 and 80 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The petition also referenced a history of similar defamatory incidents.
In 2008, a Hindi magazine, Prakhar Vichar/Prakhar Astha, published derogatory material about the saint, resulting in FIRs under charges including sedition (124A) and promoting enmity (153A).
Although the Press Council of India censured the magazine in 2011, a writ filed by its editors was dismissed with costs.
The petition named the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, and the Chief and State Commissioners for Persons with Disabilities as respondents, in addition to Facebook, Instagram, Google, and YouTube.
During the proceedings, the Union of India’s counsel informed the bench that instructions from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting were still pending, but the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities recognized that the State Commissioner was authorized under the 2016 Act to act on such complaints.
The court noted that despite the petitioners’ detailed representations, including a cease-and-desist notice served on September 3, 2025, neither the authorities nor the platforms had acted to remove the content.
The bench observed that, prima facie, the video annexed in the petition was sufficient for the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities in Lucknow to initiate action against Shashank Shekhar. Simultaneously, it emphasized that under the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Google, and YouTube are required to act swiftly on grievances regarding unlawful or defamatory digital content.
Consequently, the court directed the petitioners to file a complaint with the grievance officers of the platforms within a week, ensuring that once notified, the companies must promptly remove the content.
The State Commissioner was also instructed to issue a notice to Shekhar, hear his explanation, and take appropriate action under the disability rights law.
Furthermore, the petitioners were ordered to serve notices to all respondents and file an affidavit of compliance within two weeks.
The next hearing is scheduled for October 8, 2025.
Case Title: Sharad Chandra Srivastava 7 Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 9 Others