Delhi court orders takedown of video accusing Chattarpur Guruji of fraud, sexual assault

A Delhi court recently passed an interim order directing the takedown of an allegedly defamatory YouTube video that made claims of fraud, cheating and sexual assault against late Nirmal Singh Maharaj, popularly known as Chattarpur waale Guruji [Guruji Ka Ashram Trust vs. Molitics Infomedia Pvt. Ltd.].

In an order passed on January 24, District Judge Sachin Mittal held that the content in the YouTube video was prima facie defamatory and capable of causing irreparable harm to the reputation of Singh's Ashram Trust, trustees and devotees.

The Court directed YouTube and its operators to remove the video within two days and restrained the creators and all others from publishing or circulating similar defamatory material until the next date of hearing.

The order was passed in a suit filed by Guruji Ka Ashram Trust, which manages the affairs of the spiritual institution founded by Singh, a figure who continues to command an enormous following in Delhi and the National Capital Region even years after his death.

The Trust sought permanent and mandatory injunctions, along with damages, alleging that a video uploaded on January 15, 2026, on the YouTube channel “Molitics” was grossly defamatory.

At the outset, the Court noted a technical defect in the manner in which the suit was filed. Since a public charitable trust is not a juristic person, the Court directed that the cause title be amended to show the plaintiff as “Guruji Ka Ashram Trust, through its Trustee”, invoking its powers under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Court thereafter considered the Trust’s plea for urgent interim relief. Counsel for the Trust argued that the impugned video, titled “Jai Guru Ji ke bhakt thagi, balatkaar aur fraud mein shaamil hai? | Fraud Baba by Neeraj Jha”, used highly disparaging expressions such as “loot”, “thagi” (cheat), “fraud baba” and “balatkaar” (rape), both in the video and its thumbnail.

The Court independently viewed the 17-minute video, which had been filed on a pen drive along with the plaint. It recorded that the allegedly defamatory expressions were indeed used in the content and that the thumbnail image itself appeared prima facie disparaging.

The Court underlined the importance of reputation in law. It observed that defamation constitutes an injury to reputation and that such injury cannot always be quantified in monetary terms.

It noted that allowing the video to remain online would cause greater prejudice to the plaintiff (the trust) than any inconvenience that might be caused to the defendants by restraining publication. It also accepted the Trust’s argument that delay in granting relief would defeat the very purpose of the suit, given the speed at which online content spreads.

The Court thus passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction directing YouTube and its operators to take down the specific URL within two days. The creators of the video and their associates were restrained from publishing or circulating any defamatory material of a similar nature.

The injunction was extended to unidentified persons who had been sharing or republishing the video as well, in view of the imminent risk to the Trust’s reputation.

The Court clarified that its directions were interim and nature and issued summons to the defendants (creators of the YouTube channel).

The case will be heard next on February 26.

[Read Order]