Delhi High Court: Approach Social Media Platforms First for Objectionable Content Takedown, Not Courts
Court clarifies IT Rules require complainants to use platform remedies before seeking injunctions
Judges highlight personality rights, say misuse of courts for direct takedown orders will not be entertained
By Our Legal Reporter
New Delhi: December 02, 2025:
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has held that individuals seeking urgent removal of objectionable content from social media must first approach the concerned platform before seeking judicial intervention. The Court clarified that the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 provide a statutory mechanism for takedown requests, and litigants cannot bypass this process by directly approaching courts.
Also Read: Surat Chartered Accountants Drag CBDT to Gujarat High Court Over Income Tax Portal Failures
The judgment, delivered by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, came in a case involving personality rights and online defamation. The Court stressed that complainants who fail to use platform remedies may not be entitled to ex-parte injunctions.
Background of the Case
The case involved a plaintiff seeking removal of objectionable and defamatory content uploaded on social media platforms. The plaintiff argued that the content violated his personality rights and reputation and sought immediate court intervention for takedown orders.
However, the Court noted that the plaintiff had not first approached the social media intermediaries, as required under the IT Rules. These rules mandate that platforms must provide grievance redressal mechanisms for users to report objectionable content.
Court’s Observations
The Delhi High Court made several important observations:
- Mandatory First Step: Complainants must first approach the social media platform’s grievance officer before seeking judicial relief.
- No Direct Injunctions: Courts will not grant ex-parte injunctions if the statutory mechanism under IT Rules is not used.
- Platforms Cooperate: Social media intermediaries appearing in court proceedings did not object to removing inappropriate content when approached through proper channels.
- Personality Rights: The Court acknowledged the importance of protecting personality rights but emphasized that due process must be followed.
Justice Arora stated: “If henceforth a complainant approaches the Court without availing the statutory mechanism provided under the IT Intermediary Rules, the said party may be held to be not entitled to an ex-parte ad-interim injunction.”
Wider Context: Personality Rights Cases
The ruling comes amid a series of high-profile cases involving personality rights and objectionable online content:
Also Read: Madras High Court Orders New PAN After Duplicate Allotment Damages Original Holder’s Credit Score
- Ajay Devgn Case (Nov 2025): The Delhi High Court restrained websites from using actor Ajay Devgn’s name, image, and AI deepfakes without consent, ordering takedown of obscene content.
- Raj Shamani Case (Nov 2025): The Court protected podcaster Raj Shamani’s personality rights, directing removal of objectionable posts against him.
- Political Figures: Recently, Jammu & Kashmir Deputy CM Surinder Kumar Choudhary filed a defamation suit seeking removal of objectionable content, with the Court directing him to implead uploaders as defendants.
These cases highlight the growing importance of personality rights in the digital age, where misuse of names, images, and reputations is rampant.
Legal Significance
The Delhi High Court’s ruling has wide implications:
- Strengthens IT Rules: Reinforces the statutory grievance redressal mechanism under the IT Intermediary Rules, 2021.
- Reduces Court Burden: Encourages complainants to use platform remedies first, reducing unnecessary litigation.
- Clarifies Process: Provides clarity on the sequence of steps for takedown requests—platform first, court later.
- Protects Rights: Ensures personality rights are safeguarded while maintaining procedural discipline.
Impact on Citizens and Social Media Platforms
For citizens:
Also Read: Bombay High Court Upholds SEBI Approval for WeWork India IPO, Dismisses Investor Petitions
- They must file complaints with the platform’s grievance officer before approaching courts.
- Direct court petitions without using IT Rules remedies may be rejected.
- Protecting personality rights remains possible, but through proper channels.
For platforms:
- They must ensure grievance redressal mechanisms are functional and responsive.
- Failure to act on complaints could still lead to judicial intervention.
- Compliance with IT Rules is critical to avoid liability.
Expert Views
Legal experts have welcomed the ruling as a balanced approach. According to practitioners:
- The judgment prevents misuse of courts for bypassing statutory remedies.
- It strengthens accountability of social media platforms.
- It also ensures that personality rights are respected, while maintaining procedural fairness.
Experts caution, however, that platforms must act swiftly on complaints to avoid forcing users into prolonged litigation.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s ruling that litigants must first approach social media platforms before seeking court injunctions for objectionable content takedown is a landmark clarification in India’s digital law landscape. By reinforcing the IT Intermediary Rules, 2021, the Court has streamlined the process, reduced judicial burden, and ensured that personality rights are protected through proper channels.
This judgment is expected to guide future cases, encourage responsible platform behaviour, and provide citizens with a clear roadmap for protecting their online reputation.
Suggested Keywords for SEO (Google + ChatGPT)
- Delhi High Court objectionable content ruling
- Social media takedown IT Rules 2021
- Personality rights India court cases
- Ajay Devgn personality rights case
- Raj Shamani Delhi HC ruling
- Objectionable content removal India
- IT Intermediary Rules grievance mechanism
- Delhi HC social media injunction process
- Online defamation India court ruling
- Personality rights protection Delhi High Court
Also Read: Delhi ITAT Rules Farmhouse is a Residential House, Grants Section 54F Tax Relief