A Bengaluru court on Tuesday granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction to Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah restraining 42 media organisations, digital platforms and other defendants from publishing or circulating videos linking him to a honey-trap controversy.
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge B Pushpanjali passed the order in a defamation suit filed by Siddaramaiah.
The court restrained the defendants from telecasting, rebroadcasting or otherwise disseminating the two videos dated September 27 and October 2 or any clips, extracts, screenshots, transcripts or edited versions of the same.
Siddaramaiah sought a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from publishing or circulating the videos and related material, besides directions to remove the content and disable access to it on relevant digital platforms.
The suit names 42 defendants - including Freedom TV Kannada, the YouTube channel Karnataka Honey Trap, several Kannada and English newspapers and television news channels, WhatsApp, YouTube LLC, Google India, Yahoo India and Facebook India.
According to the plaint, the first video was uploaded by the Karnataka Honey Trap channel on September 27 under the title “Karnataka Honey Trap Nexus Part 1”.
Siddaramaiah has alleged that the video and its accompanying caption attempted to link him to allegations of blackmail, an alleged honey-trap network and political developments surrounding his tenure as Chief Minister.
The caption allegedly raised questions about whether Siddaramaiah had been blackmailed and whether compromising material had played a role in his resignation as Chief Minister earlier this year.
The former Chief Minister has categorically denied the insinuations, describing them as false and baseless and alleging that they were intended to damage his reputation and political standing.
The second publication concerns an hour-long programme streamed or uploaded by Freedom TV Kannada on October 2, 2026, under the title LIVE: Biggest CD Blast in Karnataka Politics? According to the plaint, the programme sensationalised the controversy by repeatedly referring to an alleged CD and suggesting the involvement of a prominent political leader without displaying independently verified material substantiating the allegations.
The suit also refers to a purported recording in which a woman allegedly claims that she was sexually exploited when she was a minor in or around 2011 and identifies Siddaramaiah as the person allegedly involved. The plaint states that the recording surfaced publicly only in September 2026, approximately 15 years after the alleged incident.
Siddaramaiah has contended that the material does not disclose any contemporaneous complaint, independent witness statement or other independently verifiable evidence substantiating the allegations. He has also questioned the manner in which the conversation was recorded and presented, alleging that the questioning was structured to elicit a particular narrative.
The plaint further alleges that the timing of the publications and the accompanying political commentary were intended to bring him into public disrepute. Arguing that the continued availability of the videos posed a risk of further dissemination through clips, edited versions, screenshots and social media posts, Siddaramaiah contended that such circulation would cause irreparable harm to his reputation.
The matter has been posted to November 13 for summons.
Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol appeared for the ex-CM. The plea was filed by advocates Shathabish Shivanna and Praveen Kamath.
[Read order]