The Delhi High Court on Thursday suggested that Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka voluntarily take down social media posts concerning BJP leader and Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, observing that making allegations against someone without verification was not correct. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela was hearing Bhatia’s ₹2 crore defamation suit against Das, Ranka, CJP founder Abhijit Dipke and the organisation.

The suit arises from a September 5 post on X concerning right-wing influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj’s arrest. According to Bhatia’s suit, an AI-generated graphic falsely attributed to him remarks describing Bhardwaj as “dimagi naxali” and “jaatiwaadi.” Das had subsequently deleted the post and stated that it was AI-generated, while Bhatia alleged that the disputed material had also been amplified by Ranka.

During the hearing, the Court said it did not want to immediately pass a mandatory takedown order if the defendants were willing to remove the posts themselves. Court orally remarked: “There are different ways of protesting. You are all youngsters. You may have anxieties. But attacking like this without verifying is not correct right. If you are willing to take down on your own, put your replies. We don’t want to pass takedown order.”

When counsel for Das submitted that the tweet had already been deleted, the Court pointed out that another post had also been made and stressed the importance of responsible expression.

The Court also indicated that Bhatia could have attempted to resolve the dispute directly with the defendants before approaching the Court. Bhatia, however, submitted that this was a case of aggravated defamation and that the posts could not remain online given the defendants’ large following. He said he had already given them an opportunity to remove the material.

The Bench then asked counsel for Das and Ranka to take instructions on whether they were willing to remove the posts voluntarily. It also questioned the impleadment of Dipke and CJP, noting that the allegations appeared to concern posts made by Das and Ranka. Counsel for Dipke submitted that there was no tweet by Dipke and sought his deletion from the array of parties.

The Court thereafter told the counsel for Das and Ranka to take instructions. The matter was passed over for instructions.