Aaradhya Bachchan v. Bollywood Time
In the High Court of Delhi
CS (Comm) 230/2023
Before Justice C. Hari Shankar
Decided on April 20, 2023

Relevancy of the Case: Restraining order against defendants for posting photos and videos spreading misinformation regarding the plaintiff’s physical and mental health

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 79)
• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Section 80, 149, Order II Rule 2, Order XI Rule 1(4), Rule 2, Order XXXIX Rule 1, 2, 3)
• The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Section 12A)
• The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 65B)
• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Rule 4(4))

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The plaintiff is a minor child who is a daughter of a celebrity family. For publicity, some individuals post videos on social media platforms stating that the plaintiff is critically ill.
• These individuals have even claimed that the plaintiff is no more and posted pictures with wreaths surrounding her face. The videos involve inviting subscriptions from the viewers.
• Such actions violate the intellectual property rights of the plaintiff’s family, including copyright in the plaintiff’s images.
• Hence, the plaintiff, through her father, has brought the present suit before the court.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The plaintiff’s counsel submitted that they were not seeking censorship of content uploaded on YouTube before it was uploaded. However, the intermediary should follow a more stringent nature of responsibility.
• The respondent’s counsel, appearing for Google/YouTube, argued that her client had no control over the content of the videos. YouTube does not screen videos before they are posted. Only a remedial mechanism is available for people who object to the information posted.

Opinion of the Bench

• Every child deserves to be treated with honour and respect, whether the child of a celebrity or an ordinary man.
• Dissemination of any misleading information about a child, especially regarding her physical and mental health, is utterly intolerable in law.

Final Decision

• The court passed restraining orders against defendants 1 to 9 from uploading content related to the plaintiff and directed YouTube to disclose the defendants’ contact details.