Delhi High Court protects personality rights of Lucknow Supergiants owner Sanjiv Goenka

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday agreed to protect the personality rights of industrialist Dr Sanjiv Goenka, owner of Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Lucknow Super Giants, in a plea alleging abusive social media content during the ongoing IPL season [Dr Sanjiv Goenka Vs Google].

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela agreed to pass the direction after Goenka flagged multiple instances of posts misusing his likeness through morphed images circulating online.

It was argued that the content, shared widely in the context of IPL discussions, was derogatory and went beyond permissible humour or satire.

Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi, appearing for Goenka, told the Court that his likeness was being misused through a series of morphed images and videos, many of which created false narratives of incidents that never occurred.

He pointed to multiple instances where his face was superimposed onto other persons, including fabricated depictions suggesting violent or inappropriate conduct. It was argued that such content, amplified during IPL-related discourse, went far beyond humour and caused reputational harm.

“This is not mere humour or parody,” his counsel submitted.

He added that while some level of lampooning may be acceptable, the content in question distorted reality and impacted not just Goenka’s reputation but also the institutions and employees associated with him.

During the hearing, the Court engaged in a detailed discussion on the limits of free speech. It observed that public figures are bound to face commentary and even lampooning and “nobody can say that no one should use my name or image at all.”

At the same time, the Bench made it clear that when content involves face morphing and creates false narratives, it crosses into objectionable territory.

Social media intermediaries told the Court that they are not the creators of the content and function as neutral hosts. They argued that their obligations arise only upon specific legal notice, in line with safe harbour protections.

They also cautioned against misuse of such court orders and said that broad directions for disclosure of user details or takedowns could have a chilling effect on free speech, particularly in cases involving public figures and ongoing public events.

They suggested a balanced mechanism where content may be flagged to them for takedown, with liberty to approach the court in case of disputes.

After examining the submissions, the Court observed that a balance must be struck between freedom of expression and protection of reputation.

Therefore, it proceeded to grant protection to Goenka’s personality rights.

The Court also indicated that it would consider directing disclosure of Basic Subscriber Information and IP logs to identify the origin of the content.

Sethi was briefed by a team from Anand & Anand led by advocates Pravin Anand (Managing Partner) and Dhruv Anand (Partner).

Advocate Aditya Gupta from Ira Law appeared for Google.