The Delhi High Court has granted an ad-interim injunction in favour of two content creators operating the digital content creation channel “Slayy Point”, restraining unidentified persons, pornographic websites and social media platforms from uploading, hosting or disseminating non-consensual, morphed and AI-generated sexually explicit content falsely depicting the plaintiffs.
The suit was filed seeking permanent and mandatory injunctions along with damages, alleging that pornographic and deepfake content impersonating the plaintiffs had been widely circulated across multiple online platforms. The plaintiffs contended that routine internet searches of their names or channel ‘Slayy Point’ disproportionately led to links containing obscene and defamatory material, causing grave and ongoing harm to their reputation and privacy.
Considering the sensitive nature of the content, Justice Vikas Mahajan allowed the plaintiffs’ request to mask their names in the judicial record and directed the Registry accordingly. The registry was also directed to take on record a pen drive containing the impugned material.
On a prima facie perusal, the Court observed that the content was “completely defamatory, derogatory” and amounted to a patent violation of the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to privacy.
The Court held that a prima facie case was made out, that the balance of convenience lay in favour of the plaintiffs, and irreparable harm would be caused to them if interim relief was not granted. Accordingly, it restrained John Doe defendants and pornographic websites from further uploading, sharing or disseminating the offending content, directed social media intermediaries and platforms to take down specified URLs, and ordered Google to de-index the links from search results.
The Court granted the plaintiff liberty to notify intermediaries and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) of any additional URLs or platforms hosting the impugned content for their removal and blocking.
The Union of India, through MeitY, was impleaded as a party and directed to block the identified websites and issue directions to Internet Service Providers to block access to the offending URLs. The Court also directed major platforms to disclose subscriber information and available details relating to the creators of the impugned content.
The Court granted four weeks’ time to file replies and listed the matter for further hearing on January 30, 2026.
Appearances
Plaintiffs- Ms. Diya Kapur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nakul Gandhi, Ms. Mridul Crystelle Singh, Ms. Siddhi Sahoo, Mr. Aditya Ladha, Mr. Raghav Kumar, Mr Mujeeb, Advocates.
Defendants- Mr. Ankit Parihar, Ms. Sneha Dey and Ms. Shreya Gupta, Advocates for D43. Mr. Ankit Parihar and Mr Abhishek Kumar, Advocate for D44. Ms. Mamta Rani Jha, Ms. Shrutitima Ehersa, Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Ms. Aishwarya Debardarshini and Ms. Jahanvi Agarwal, Advocates for D45.
