'They Must Be Sensitive For Prime Minister': Delhi HC Orders Take Down Of Morphed, Deepfake Content Allegedly Posted By CJP Leaders

The Delhi High Court on Friday directed Meta Platforms to immediately remove, and in any event within 24 hours, allegedly morphed and deepfake content involving a woman and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, after she alleged that the images were circulated online and displayed during a demonstration organised by leaders of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).

Justice Girish Kathpalia also directed the Delhi Police to provide complete police protection to the woman, who claimed that she had been receiving threats following circulation of the alleged deepfake content.

During the hearing, the Court underscored the sensitivity of the matter, observing: "It is not just a matter of the lady but also about the Prime Minister of the country. If they are not sensitive, I will ensure they become sensitive."

The plea has been filed by the woman alleging that the CJP leaders ran a vicious, coordinated cyber-assault and public character assassination using deepfake technology.

The petitioner has alleged that the CJP leaders unauthorizedly harvested her personal photograph and used AI face-swapping tools to morph her face onto a "highly vulgar and compromising image" alongside the PM.

Woman alleges morphed photographs circulated despite FIR

Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Umesh Sharma submitted that her photographs had been morphed and uploaded on the internet and that the police had failed to act despite registration of an FIR.

" My photographs have been morphed and uploaded on the internet. Despite registration...despite my complaint, police has done nothing. Despite FIR, police has till date done nothing. They should first take down the entire content, My Lord. That's my prayer. And I am constantly receiving threats now " counsel submitted.

The petitioner's counsel further alleged that the photographs were explicit and that the petitioner was facing threats because of their circulation. The Court initially observed that the relief seeking removal of the photographs would ordinarily have to be pursued before the civil bench.

However, Justice Kathpalia said the petitioner should not be made to run from one forum to another given the sensitivity of the matter. " This relief, as I said, should have gone to the civil bench. But looking into the sensitivity, we should not make the lady run from one place to another " he said.

The Court also observed that the petitioner's address should not be disclosed, citing an earlier case in which disclosure of a victim's address had caused difficulties.

Court directs Meta to remove content within 24 hours

The petitioner had sought directions to trace, block and purge the allegedly morphed explicit photographs and deepfake content from social media platforms as well as other websites where the material had allegedly been uploaded.

The Court directed respondent no. 6, Meta Platforms, to remove the objectionable content from the social media platforms managed by it. The order states: " Respondent no. 6 is directed to immediately remove the above-mentioned objectionable content from the social media platforms managed by it ."

During the hearing, Justice Kathpalia clarified that 'immediately' would mean that the content should be removed at the most within 24 hours.

The Court also recorded the submission of the Additional Solicitor General that Investigating Officer SI Anurag would furnish the relevant web links and other details to Meta so that the objectionable content could be removed.

The Court further directed that notice be issued to CJP leaders Abhijeet Dipke, Sourav Das, Ashutosh Ranka and Ratna Singh through the Investigating Officer.

The Court ordered the Registry to make sure that objectionable pictures and videos be redacted from the petition and the annexures as a matter of abundant precaution.

The petitioner was nevertheless directed to hand over the relevant photographs and videos, along with the links, to the investigating agency in electronic form.

The Court specifically directed: " As is obvious, the investigating agency shall maintain strict confidentiality of the said pictures and videos ".

Court asks Delhi Police to file status report within one week

The petition also sought a comprehensive and expeditious investigation into FIR No. 22/26, registered at the Cyber Police Station, New Delhi. The Delhi Police accepted notice and submitted that the FIR had been registered only the previous day and that action would be taken expeditiously.

Taking note of the nature of the allegations, Justice Kathpalia directed the police to file a status report within one week. The order states: " Keeping in mind the nature of the issue involved, the status report be filed by respondent no. 1 within one week, detailing the exact action taken ."

During the hearing, the Court also made clear that the police investigation must proceed against those responsible for the alleged circulation.

Woman's address to be kept confidential; police protection ordered

The petitioner had not disclosed her present residential address in the petition. Justice Kathpalia said this was the correct decision, particularly in light of the possibility of the address being circulated.

The Court directed the petitioner to disclose her exact residential address privately to SI Anurag, who would immediately transmit it to the SHO of the police station having jurisdiction over her residence.

The SHO was directed to ensure: "complete police protection to petitioner in all possible and practical manner."

A status report regarding the protection provided to the petitioner is to be filed within two weeks.

The Judge also told the woman that she need not appear in court if she did not wish to, saying: " I don't want tomorrow anything to happen outside the court room...Aapko darne ki zarurat nahi hai ."

The Court's concern was that the petitioner should not face any further threat because of her appearance in the proceedings.

CJP leaders issued notice

The Court issued notice to respondent nos. 2 to 5 [Abhijeet Dipke, Sourav Das, Ashutosh Ranka and Ratna Singh] through the Investigating Officer.

The petitioner's case, as recorded in the order, is that the respondents organised the demonstration at Jantar Mantar during which the allegedly morphed photographs were displayed.

The order records: "Those photographs, according to the petitioner, were displayed widely along with obscene and derogatory slogans in the recently organized illegal demonstration of the Cockroach Janata Party at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi."

It further records: "The said demonstration was organized by the present respondent nos. 2 to 5."

The Court has recorded these allegations at the present stage; the issuance of notice and interim directions do not amount to a finding that the respondents committed the alleged acts.

Court asks about compensation

During the hearing, Justice Kathpalia also asked whether the petitioner had sought compensation. The Judge referred to a Supreme Court judgment concerning liability arising from illegalities committed during political demonstrations and asked counsel whether compensation had been claimed against the organisers.

Counsel stated that compensation had not been sought in the present petition. The petitioner's counsel subsequently submitted that the woman was contemplating appropriate legal proceedings for compensation.

The Court clarified that the present petition would not prevent her from pursuing any other remedy available under law. "It is made clear that the filing of the present petition shall not preclude the petitioner from claiming any other relief to which she is entitled in law" Court said

'It’s a matter of a Prime Minister': Court stresses sensitivity

Towards the end of the hearing, Justice Kathpalia explained why the Court was intervening despite the availability of other legal remedies.

"Otherwise I would not interfere in this kind of proceedings because you have remedy available in law. But this is an extraordinary position in which it is not just a matter of one lady. It's a matter of a Prime Minister of this country " He said.

The Judge then added: "So if we are not sensitive to it, if they are not sensitive, I'll ensure that they become sensitive."