Allahabad High Court Directs Meta To Take Down 'Defamatory' Content Against Swami Ram Bhadracharya

A Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Prashant Kumar passed the order while dealing with a writ petition filed by the followers and disciples of Swami Ram Bhadracharya Ji seeking immediate removal of 'derogatory' and 'abusive' content circulated against him on social media platforms.

The petitioners approached the Court last month alleging inaction on the part of both Central and State authorities, despite them moving a formal representations seeking action against the defamatory material.

Background of the case

Briefly put, the 8 petitioners, represented by Advocate Ranjana Agnihotri, filed the writ petition invoking provisions including Section 98 BNSS, various sections of BNS 2023, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

They alleged that a Gorakhpur-based YouTuber and reporter [Shashank Shekhar (Respondent No.10)], along with another individual, had uploaded on August 29, 2025, a malicious and defamatory video titled "Rambhadracharya par Khulasa, 16 saal pahle kya hua tha", on his YouTube channel and other social media handles including Facebook and Instagram.

The petitioners argued that the video contained "defamatory, derogatory, vile and abusive news items" targeting Swami Ji, who is visually impaired.

The petition also stated that similar defamatory publications had been made in 2008 through the magazine Prakhar Vichar/Prakhar Aastha, against which Swami Ji had successfully pursued legal and administrative action.

The matter first came up before a Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Brij Raj Singh on September 17, 2025, which, after hearing both sides, recorded a prima facie view that the annexed screenshots and videos were sufficient for the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities to initiate legal action against the YouTuber.

The Court had also directed that the petitioners should submit a formal complaint to the Grievance Redressal Officers of the concerned social media intermediaries (Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube) and that these platforms must ensure the immediate removal of the defamatory content in accordance with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Observing that the State and Central Governments have an obligation to protect the fundamental right to reputation, recognized under Article 21 of the Constitution, and to maintain public order, morality and decency, the Court had directed the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (Respondent No.5) to look into the matter and take appropriate action against the Opposite Party No.10 after issuing notice to him and hearing his explanation.

October 8 order : Meta and Google asked to act within 48 hours

When the case was taken up again on October 8, 2025, a Bench of Justice Saraf and Justice Prashant Kumar recorded multiple important developments in the matter.

Firstly, it noted the submissions from counsel representing social media intermediaries that the entities impleaded earlier were incorrectly named.

The Court, therefore, directed the petitioners to correct the record by substituting Facebook India Online Services Pvt. Ltd. and Instagram India with 'Meta Platforms, Inc.', and by substituting Google and YouTube with 'Google LLC'.

The Bench reiterated that, as per the earlier order dated September 17, the respondents were required to take down the objectionable content. Counsel appearing for Meta submitted that the company could act only after receiving the specific URL links to the defamatory videos.

Recording the statement of petitioners' counsel agreeing to provide the links, the Court directed:

"Once the URL information is provided to Meta Platforms, Inc., the link should be taken down within a period of 48 hours".

It was also noted that the link mentioned in paragraph 14 of the writ petition had already been removed by Google LLC.

The Bench was also apprised that the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (Respondent No.5) has already issued a notice to the YouTuber in question (Respondent No.10) in response to the petitioners' complaint, and the latter has been summoned to appear before the authority on October 18, 2025.

The Court granted time to all respondents to file their counter affidavits within three weeks, and permitted the petitioners to file a rejoinder within one week thereafter. The matter has been listed next for hearing on November 11, 2025.