Court Weighs Privacy vs. Public Satire in Politician's Case

The Delhi High Court deliberated on Tuesday over the nuanced line between satire and defamation, particularly in political contexts. Presiding over the case, Justice Amit Bansal observed that politicians ought to be resilient to criticism yet emphasized a necessary distinction between satire and defamatory statements.

The case arose from a complaint by Gaurav Bhatia, a senior advocate and BJP leader, who requested the removal of allegedly defamatory social media content following his appearance on a TV show. Bhatia was reported to have been wearing a kurta "without any pants/pyjama," leading to mocking online posts. Bhatia asserted his privacy was breached as a photo taken from the episode was reportedly publicized without his consent.

Justice Bansal underscored the importance of caution in issuing ex parte injunctions, setting a hearing for September 25. Bhatia contended the image emerged from a private setting, but Justice Bansal highlighted the necessity for clear differentiation between satire and offense when reviewing online commentary.

(With inputs from agencies.)