Madras High Court asks YouTuber to pay ₹50 lakh compensation for defaming trans activist Apsara Reddy

The Madras High Court recently directed YouTuber Joe Micheal Praveen to pay ₹ 50 lakh as compensation to politician and trans person Apsara Reddy, for having posted defamatory material and videos against her on social media and YouTube [Apsara Reddy v. Joe Micheal Praveen and anr]..Reddy, a celebrity speaker, journalist and AIADMK spokesperson had told the Court that YouTuber Joe Micheal Praveen had made repeated defamatory posts against her. .In an order passed on January 4, Justice N Sathish Kumar went through several such videos and posts that Reddy had submitted in Court and noted that they were defamatory and had been posted online without any attempt on Praveen's part to verify the truth. ."The perusal of the entire defamatory statements particularly the contents in the videos, which is also extracted in the plaint, the statements are nothing but malicious and defamatory touching upon the privacy of any individual. Merely because a person has a right to post in YouTube, he cannot cross his limit encroaching upon the privacy of others. Though the publication is a right, such a right is subject to reasonable restrictions and cannot be encroached upon the privacy of others. When such statements are surfaced, particularly in social media like YouTube touching upon the character, behaviour and personal life of any individual, it will have serious impact in that particular area. The very statements surfaced in the Youtube videos Ex.P.14, makes it clear that the same are objectionable and malicious statements have been made without any semblance of truth. Such statements perse defamatory in nature with malicious content. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the first defendant (Praveen) is liable to pay the damages," the Court said..Reddy had also told the Court that in 2017, while she was working as an Editor at a well-known magazine, Praveen had expressed his desire to do a joint video programme with her. However, when Reddy refused, Praveen became "angry and started gossiping and circulating bad notions" about Reddy.Reddy said that several shows that she had been invited to for speaking and interacting with others were cancelled following Praveen's defamatory posts against her. Reddy added that he had to undergo much stress and mental agony as a result and demanded ₹ 1.25 crores from Praveen as damages..The Court agreed that Praveen's posts and videos had caused much damage and humiliation to Reddy.It added that though one had a right to post videos on YouTube, one could not encroach upon the privacy of others in the process. "The reputation of the plaintiff (Reddy) has been lowered to a level that many of the programmes of the plaintiff has been cancelled abruptly. Cancellation of such programmes abruptly is mainly because of the circulation of the malicious contents in the social media. All these factors clearly indicate that though the damages cannot be certain, the plaintiff has to be compensated atleast for a sum of Rs.50 lakhs,” the Court ordered..The Court also noted that the defamatory YouTube videos in question have now been deleted by Google (which owns YouTube). Therefore, Reddy had not pressed her case against Google (the second defendant in the suit). On a parting note, however, the Court sounded a warning note against allowing such malicious content on the platform in the future. .Senior counsel V Raghavachari and advocate VS Sentil Kumar appeared for Reddy.Advocate G Balasubramanian of Leela & Co appeared for Praveen.