A Mumbai court issued a contempt notice to Sundar Pichai regarding YouTube’s failure to remove a video flagged as defamatory. The contempt petition was filed by the NGO Dhyan Foundation, citing non-compliance by the platform in taking down the content. The video allegedly targets the NGO and its founder. This legal action highlights ongoing concerns about content regulation on digital platforms.
An Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court at Ballard Pier in Mumbai, On November 21, issued a notice to Google’s CEO Sundar Pichai regarding YouTube’s failure to remove an allegedly defamatory video targeting the NGO Dhyan Foundation and its founder, Yogi Ashwini.
The contempt case scheduled for a hearing on January 3, 2025.
In March 2023, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of the 38th Court at Ballard Pier ordered YouTube to take down a video titled “Pakhandi Baba ki Kartut” following a complaint from Dhyan Foundation, which claimed the video contained false and damaging allegations that harmed its reputation.
Read Also: Madras High Court: YouTube channels turning as Threat to Society
YouTube, owned by Google, defended itself by asserting immunity as an intermediary under the Information Technology Act (IT Act). The platform argued that defamation does not fall under the categories specified in Section 69-A of the Act, which permits content blocking, and maintained that such issues should be resolved in civil courts rather than criminal courts.
However, the Court dismissed YouTube’s technical objections, stating that the IT Act does not prohibit Criminal Courts from intervening in these matters.
The order noted,
“No where it is mentioned that criminal court has no jurisdiction to entertain such application. Therefore, in my humble opinion, the ratio of above said authorities will not bar maintainability of the present application.”
The magistrate acknowledged the video’s defamatory nature and expressed concern that its ongoing circulation could threaten public peace.
The Court stated,
“The sentiments of followers of any organisation in India are very sensitive particularly when it comes regarding belief. Therefore, if those videos are not restricted, it may cause threat to public order and security of the State,”
Dhyan Foundation contends that the takedown order has not been fulfilled, leading them to file a contempt petition for non-compliance. Although the contempt plea was submitted in October 2023, a notice regarding it was only issued in November 2024.
The Dhyan Foundation, founded in 2002 under the leadership of Yogi Ashwini, is a non-profit organization committed to promoting ancient Indian disciplines including Yoga, Ayurveda, Mantras, Meditation, Healing, Yagyas, and Vedic Martial Arts. With a global presence, the foundation follows the traditional Guru-Shishya Parampara, providing its teachings at no cost.
In addition to its educational initiatives, the foundation is actively engaged in animal welfare, particularly focusing on the rescue and rehabilitation of cattle. They offer critical surgeries, prosthetic limb fittings, and comprehensive care to relieve suffering and support the animals’ recovery.
A contempt notice is a legal directive issued by a court when someone is accused of failing to comply with its orders, potentially disrespecting or undermining the authority of the court.
In the context of YouTube content:
- Legal Context: If a court orders YouTube to remove specific content, failure to do so can lead to a contempt notice being issued against the responsible party, including YouTube executives.
- Purpose: It compels the platform or its representatives to explain the non-compliance and take corrective action. The notice aims to enforce the court’s orders and uphold its authority.
- For YouTube: When YouTube does not take down content flagged as defamatory, harmful, or illegal, as directed by the court, it may be held in contempt. This can result in fines, penalties, or other legal consequences for YouTube or its officials.
In the specific case involving Dhyan Foundation, the contempt notice indicates that the court found YouTube’s failure to remove the allegedly defamatory video a violation of its orders, prompting legal action against Sundar Pichai as a representative of Google, YouTube’s parent company.