Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

35. The plaintiffs state that they fear unknown parties (John Doe/defendants) may spread similar defamatory content, citing the pattern of coordinated online campaigns and the viral nature of content.

36. Based on the aforesaid direction, plaintiffs seek ex-parte ad-interim injunction against the defendant.

37. This Court has heard the arguments of Mr. Ashim Vaccher, learned senior counsel for the plaintiffs and examined the records.

45. Having regard to the aforesaid analysis, the plaintiffs have been able to prima facie establish a strong case in their favour as against the defendants. The balance of convenience is tilted in favour of the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which may not be compensated adequately in monetary terms in case ex-parte ad-interim injunction orders are not passed.

46. In view of the above, defendant no.1/John Doe(s), defendant no.2 and defendant no.3 are restrained from spreading any information amounting to disparagement relating to plaintiff nos.1 and 2 on YouTube or any other social media and/or digital platforms, and/or from further sharing or This is a digitally signed order.