Delhi High Court - Orders
Dushyant Kumar Gautam vs Urmila Sanawar And Ors on 7 January, 2026
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 16/2026 & I.A. 284/2026, I.A. 285/2026, I.A. 286/2026
DUSHYANT KUMAR GAUTAM .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Raghav Awasthi, Ms. Simran
Brar, Mr. Neelmani Guha, Mr. Ravi
Gupta, Mr. Jagdish Trivedi, Ms. Ruhi
Ansari, Mr. Rajinder Pal Singh, Mr.
Mahipal, Mr. Tejas Gautam and Mr.
Fatehh Singh Majithia, Advocates
Mob: 9953449883
Email: [email protected]
versus
URMILA SANAWAR AND ORS. .....Defendants
Through: Mr. Varun Pathak, Ms. Radhika Roy,
Mr. Debditya Saha and Ms. Komal
Pathak, Advocates for D-11
Mob: 9007586154
Ms. Mamta Rani Jha, Ms. Shruttima
Ehersa, Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Ms.
Aiswarya Debardasini and Ms.
Jahanvi Agarwal, Advocates for D-12
Mob: 8506033268
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
ORDER
% 07.01.2026 I.A. 286/2026 (For Extension of Time to File Court Fees)
1. Learned Senior Counsel, upon instructions, submits that the requisite Court Fees has already been deposited.
2. Noting the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of.
CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 1 of 12This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 I.A. 285/2026 (For Directions)
3. The present application has been filed seeking directions to defendant no. 10 to disclose the complete details/identity (Basic Subscriber‟s Information) of defendant nos. 8 and 9 operating the X handles, as mentioned in the Memo of Parties, so that they can be served thereon.
4. Issue notice to defendant nos. 8 and 9, returnable on the next date.
5. The requisite information be provided by defendant no. 10 within a period of one week, from today.
CS(OS) 16/2026
6. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
7. Learned counsels appearing for defendant nos. 11 and 12 are present in Court, and submit that they shall duly comply with any directions passed by this Court. However, they submit that no summons be issued to the said defendants.
8. The aforesaid statement is taken note of.
9. Accordingly, issue summons to defendant nos. 1 to 10, through all permissible modes.
10. Let written statements be filed by the defendants, within a period of thirty (30) days, from today. Along with the written statement, the defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the plaintiff‟s documents, without which, the written statements shall not be taken on record.
11. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file the replication, if any, within fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication filed by the plaintiff, an affidavit of admission/denial of the defendants‟ documents be also filed by the plaintiff, without which, the CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 2 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 replication shall not be taken on record.
12. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
13. List before the Joint Registrar on 02nd March, 2026.
14. List before the Court on 04th May, 2026.
I.A. 284/2026 (For ad-Interim Ex Parte Injunction)
15. The present application has been filed seeking prayer for ad-interim ex-parte injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants, who have published and amplified various allegations against the plaintiff, which are stated to be defamatory in nature.
16. Learned Senior Counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff is Sh. Dushyant Kumar Gautam, a seasoned public figure having five decades of outstanding record in public life, and longstanding association with the Bharatiya Janata Party ("BJP"). He is currently serving as the National General Secretary of the BJP. The plaintiff has held numerous eminent organisational positions within the BJP, including that of the National General Secretary, i.e., „Prabhari' for the BJP in Uttarakhand and the head of the BJP‟s Scheduled Caste Morcha, which is also reflective of his active engagement with issues concerning marginalized communities.
17. It is submitted that the plaintiff has also contested the elections for the Delhi Legislative Assembly. The plaintiff has further rendered distinguished service as a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha, having been elected to the Upper House of the Parliament from the State of Haryana as a representative of the BJP, where he participated in legislative and policy discourse at the National level. Through these high offices and responsibilities, the plaintiff has earned substantial goodwill, public respect CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 3 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 and recognition across the country as a responsible political leader and public servant.
18. Learned Senior Counsel for the plaintiff further submits that Ms. Ankita Bhandari was a 19‑year‑old receptionist employed at the Vanantara Resort in Uttarakhand, who went missing in September, 2022 and was subsequently found dead, leading to a widely reported criminal case concerning her abduction and murder. At no stage of the investigation or trial, any investigating agency or Court named, cited or even referred to the plaintiff in connection with the said offence. It is a matter of record that till date, no Court has taken any cognizance of any offence against the plaintiff with respect to the incident, as falsely alleged/raised by the defendants in their defamatory and concocted posts and videos.
19. It is submitted that in or about late December, 2025, specifically in the last week, long after the incident of 2022, the said case was sought to be sensationally revived in the public domain, when defendant no. 1-Ms. Urmila Sanawar, an actress who claims to be the wife of former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore, released and uploaded a series of Instagram reels and related videos from her public account, i.e., "@urmila_actress_bjp", which constitutes the originating source of the defamatory narrative in question. In this original recording, defendant no. 1 purported to narrate an alleged private conversation with defendant no. 2 and while repeatedly referring to one "Gattu", has expressly identified the "VIP" for whom the deceased Ankita was allegedly being forced to provide sexual favours on the relevant night to the plaintiff, i.e., Sh. Dushyant Kumar Gautam. By such statements, defendant no. 1 falsely and maliciously portrayed the plaintiff as a sexual predator and insinuated that he was the person on whose account Ankita CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 4 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 Bhandari was being exploited and was ultimately killed, despite there being no reference to him in the investigation record or there being any judicial finding to that effect. The whole exercise of circulating these defamatory and malicious videos and posts by the defendants has been done in order to gain publicity, media coverage and political mileage, without having any credible basis and evidence to substantiate the same.
20. He further submits that the aforesaid allegations were further amplified by the defendant no. 2-Sh. Suresh Rathore, who, as per the same and other related recordings, is heard describing the alleged "VIP" seeking "extra services", and permitting the clear inference that the said "VIP" was the plaintiff, even though these imputations are wholly baseless, unverified and contrary to the investigative and prosecutorial record of the Ankita Bhandari case. The said recordings, snippets and purported revelations were disseminated by and on behalf of defendant no. 1 and defendant no. 2 with the clear object of creating a false public narrative that the plaintiff was the shadowy "VIP" behind the atrocity, even though no investigating agency or Court has ever named or implicated the plaintiff in connection with Ankita Bhandari‟s murder.
21. It is submitted that the Instagram reels and videos first published by defendant no. 1 from her Instagram handle "@urmila_actress_bjp" were widely picked up, downloaded, edited and re‑circulated across platforms. It is this very recording of defendant no. 1 which has been selectively lifted, edited and embedded into the later videos, created and disseminated by the official digital handles of the defendant no. 3- Indian National Congress, as well as by defendant nos. 3 to 9. Thus, defendant no. 1 is the primary and CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 5 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 originating author of the defamatory imputation that the plaintiff was the "VIP" in the Ankita Bhandari case.
22. He further submits that notwithstanding the above, certain official and verified channels of the Indian National Congress, on YouTube and other social media platforms chose not merely to report upon, but also to adopt, embellish and further propagate the false narrative first engineered by defendant no. 1. The official Instagram account of the Indian National Congress, operating under the handle "@incindia" and describing itself as the "Official Account of the Indian National Congress", has published and circulated Instragram reels and other content, which either directly reproduces or heavily relies upon the original video of defendant no. 1. The said reels further reference the alleged "VIP" angle of the Ankita Bhandari murder case in a manner that invites viewers to associate the said "VIP" with the plaintiff, thereby giving currency to the baseless insinuations emanating from defendant nos. 1 and 2‟s impugned recording. Likewise, the official YouTube channel titled "Indian National Congress", and described as "The Official YouTube Account of India‟s Most Vibrant Political Movement - The Indian National Congress", has uploaded and hosted videos in which party representatives have made statements linking the alleged "VIP" to a "BJP National General Secretary" in the context of the Ankita Bhandari case, thus encouraging viewers to draw the defamatory inference that the said reference is about the plaintiff.
23. He further submits that, in addition to the National‑level digital platform of the Indian National Congress, the official State‑level digital platforms of the Indian National Congress party in Uttarakhand have also been used to propagate and amplify the false narrative against the plaintiff.
CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 6 of 12This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 In particular, the Facebook page of defendant no. 4 - Uttarakhand Pradesh Congress Committee ("UPCC"), operating under the handle "@INCUttarakhand", described as the official page of Indian National Congress Uttarakhand and administered from Dehradun, has repeatedly posted photographs, graphics, text posts, reels and live videos concerning the Ankita Bhandari case, in which, references are made to a "BJP ka VIP"
and demands are raised for arrest of the alleged "VIP". The discourse is framed in a manner that invites and reinforces the defamatory inference that the said "VIP" is the plaintiff. These posts and reels have been shared alongside party campaigns and protest calls, including, content issued in the name of or featuring the State leadership of UPCC, i.e., defendant no. 5-Sh. Ganesh Godiyal, President of UPCC. Defendant‟s no. 5‟s own Facebook, page bearing the handle "@GaneshGodiyalINCUK" carries videos and live addresses in which he has referred to the Ankita Bhandari case, and attacked the BJP over the alleged "VIP" angle, and signalled that the Congress Party will pursue legal remedies over the said issue. Thus, these actions lead institutional and leadership‑level endorsement to the false narrative linking the plaintiff to the crime committed in the Ankita Bhandari case.
24. The present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff against the defendants seeking the relief of permanent and mandatory injunction, along with consequential damages, for the defendants‟ deliberate and unlawful acts of posting, hosting, publishing, circulating, uploading, and/or disseminating, either directly or indirectly, various objectionable, false and derogatory content on internet websites and digital platforms under their control.
CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 7 of 12This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47
25. It is submitted that the said content includes, but is not limited to, false and defamatory videos that may or may not be morphed, AI-generated visuals, and deepfake material, that falsely depict or purport to depict the plaintiff in a defamatory manner, and seek to condemn the plaintiff through a social media trial, without any basis whatsoever, to purportedly create a scandal. These acts are not only violative of the plaintiff‟s fundamental right to privacy, dignity, and reputation, but also amount to serious civil and criminal wrongs.
26. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that the false and defamatory information posted by defendant no. 1, has resulted in political opponents of plaintiff, like defendant nos. 3, 4 and 5, in picking up the said information and using it to run a scurrilous and malicious campaign, to malign the image of the plaintiff, being a person with political affiliations, among the common public, without an iota of proof and evidence in order to gain political mileage. The defendant nos. 3, 4 and 5, being political parties, are circulating the said defamatory videos and posts with impunity. Thus, in posting the offending audio and video content against the plaintiff, the defendant no. 1-Ms. Urmila Sanawar, and defendant no. 2 - Sh. Suresh Rathore have set off a "domino effect", whereby as the said offending material is in public domain. The defendants nos. 3 to 9 have been able to exploit to the situation, to run a malicious campaign for a large viewership through their social media channels, hosted on platforms owned by defendants nos. 10 to 12.
27. Thus, it is submitted that the plaintiff seeks urgent and efficacious intervention of this Court to restrain the defendants from continuing or repeating such unlawful conduct.
CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 8 of 12This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47
28. It is further submitted that the present suit seeks permanent and mandatory injunction, along with damages, from the defendants nos. 1 to 9, for the various abusive and defamatory statements and content made by them against the plaintiff, on the platforms of defendant no. 10-X (erstwhile Twitter), defendant no. 11-Meta Platforms (which includes Facebook and Instagram), and defendant no. 12-Google LLC. The suit further seeks a prayer for permanent injunction directing the defendant nos. 10 to 12, to take down the defamatory content posted by defendant nos. 1 to 9, from their respective platforms.
29. It is submitted that the continuance of such content online aggravates harm on a real-time basis, on account of searchability, indexing, recommendation and re-uploading/mirroring. Thus, the plaintiff suffers recurring injury each time such content is viewed, downloaded or shared, including, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
30. Thus, he submits that the plaintiff is entitled to immediate ad-interim protection by way of restraining further publication, as well as passing directions to disable access/take down the offending content, including substantially identical/mirror versions, so that the suit is not rendered infructuous, and the plaintiff‟s rights are not irreversibly prejudiced during pendency of the suit.
31. Issue notice to the defendant nos. 1 to 10 by all permissible modes, including, Email.
32. Replies be filed within a period of four weeks.
33. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two weeks, thereafter.
34. Considering the submissions made before this Court, the Court is of CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 9 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 the view that a prima facie case has been made out by the plaintiff. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff and irreparable injury would be caused to the plaintiff if defendant nos. 1 to 9, are not restrained from posting defamatory contents.
35. Consequently, till the next date of hearing, the following directions are issued:
i. The defendant nos. 1 to 9, their agents, affiliates, and all persons acting under their instructions, are restrained from posting, uploading, publishing, circulating, re-publishing, re-uploading or otherwise disseminating any content, which names, targets, insinuates or imputes that the plaintiff is the alleged "VIP" in the Ankita Bhandari case. ii. The defendant nos. 1 to 9 are directed to remove the various posts and videos uploaded on social media platforms, namely Youtube, Facebook, Instagram and X, which are reproduced as under:
xxx xxx xxx CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 10 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 xxx xxx xxx "
iii. In case, the defendant nos. 1 to 9 fail to comply with the directions as CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 11 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47 hereinabove within 24 hours of pronouncement of this order, then defendant nos. 10 to 12 are directed to take down the aforesaid posts, as per the applicable Rules.
iv. In addition to the aforesaid URLs, details of which have been reproduced hereinabove, the plaintiff is also at liberty to inform defendant nos. 10 to 12, or any other intermediary platforms/websites, of any subsequently discovered URLs containing the offending content as described in the suit or identical content, as found on their respective social media platforms and/or websites, which shall be acted upon by the defendants. In case, there is any doubt whether the notified URLs fall within the scope of the subject matter of the suit, then the said defendants or intermediaries, are at liberty to seek clarification from the plaintiff, who may then apply to Court, accordingly. v. In case any identical social media contents/URLs are informed by the plaintiff to defendant nos. 10 to 12, the details of the same shall also be filed before this Court.
36. A compliance affidavit under Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of the Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") be filed within a period of one week, from today.
37. List before the Joint Registrar on 02nd March, 2026, for completion of service and pleadings.
38. List before the Court on 04th May, 2026.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J JANUARY 7, 2026/ak CS(OS) 16/2026 Page 12 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2026 at 20:35:47