The Delhi High Court has recently passed an interim order directing Mint newspaper to take down a defamatory article against popular YouTuber Gaurav Taneja and his wife Ritu Rathee.

The article was published on Mint on May 8 that raised allegations of child abuse against Taneja and Rathee taking exception to a video put out by Taneja on his social media handles in which he was seen piercing the elder daughter’s ears.

“Piercing the ears of a girl child cannot be termed as child abuse. Allegations of child abuse are serious allegations and cannot be made without due care and verification. It cannot be based on the opinions of the author,” the Court said.

The Court also directed journalist Abhishek Baxi to take down his tweet regarding the article and to refrain from posting, circulating or publishing any similar defamatory content against Taneja and his wife on any social media or online/offline platform.

“Undoubtedly, a person has a right to criticize the views expressed by an individual and such criticism would be covered under right to free speech. However, vicious attacks cannot be made on the character of a person under the guise of journalistic freedom and free speech. In my prima facie view, there is nothing in the aforesaid videos to substantiate allegations of child abuse,” the Court said.

The article in Mint also highlighted a video put out by Taneja. It said “he is filming Ritu piercing their elder daughter’s ears and when the daughter asks him not to “vlog” it, he says, “why not!” The 10-minute video then goes on to show the daughter howling and writhing in pain while the camera zooms in on her.”

In June, a lower court had rejected Taneja’s defamation suit against Mint and Bhatt.

When they moved to High Court, it was told that the article was based on videos posted by the plaintiffs and it made allegations of misogyny, child abuse and abuse of their pet dog. It was further stated that posting of the article as well as tweets has caused immense damage to the reputation of the plaintiff with sponsors.

“This Court finds that the plaintiffs have made a prima facie case in their favour and in case no ad interim injunction is granted to the plaintiffs, irreparable harm and injury would continue to be caused to the plaintiffs. So long as the impugned articles and the impugned tweets continue to be in circulation and visible on social media, they are likely to cause damage to the reputation and career of the plaintiffs. Balance of convenience lies in favour of the plaintiffs,” the Court noted.

The Court, therefore, directed Mint and its journalist to take down the article as well as the allegedly defamatory tweets.