Delhi High Court to examine limits of free speech by social media influencers

The Delhi High Court recently decided to examine the boundaries of free speech under the Constitution of India in the context of comments made by social media influencers against consumer brands on social media platforms [San Nutrition Private Limited v. Arpit Mangal and ors]..The Court will weigh this freedom against the restrictions outlined in Article 19(2) of the Constitution, which puts reasonable limitations on free speech for the sake of public order, decency, morality, and other factors.“The moot issue arising for consideration in the present suit is: What are the limits of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) read in light of Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India concerning allegedly disparaging comments/remarks made by a social media influencer in respect of third-party goods/services?” Justice Amit Bansal observed in his December 2 order. .The Court was dealing with a suit filed by San Nutrition Private Limited, which sells nutritional supplements. The suit was filed earlier this year to protect San Nutrition's trademark and reputation.Recognising the importance of the question of law involved in the matter, the Court has asked Advocates Aditya Gupta and Varun Pathak (who appear for Google and Meta respectively), to submit notes clarifying their views on the constitutional question and its implications in their personal capacity. The case is expected to come up for hearing next on December 16. .Prominent brands have been approaching the courts recently for injunctions against disparaging remarks made by social media influencers. One such suit was filed by Mondelez India, which sells the powdered chocolate malt drink Bournvita against health influencer Revant Himatsingka (FoodPharmer). Bournvita sued Himatsingka for defamation after he uploaded videos flagging high sugar content in Bournvita. One such video went viral and led public authorities to enquire into the veracity of Bournvita being called a health drink.On October 15 the Delhi High Court passed an interim order restraining Himatsingka from issuing, uploading or telecasting any videos, publications or posts that disparage Bournvita. The Court, however, clarified that FoodPharmer is barred from making factual assertions regarding the product. This case is slated to be heard next in February 2025. Meanwhile, on December 3, the Court temporarily restrained an enterprise called Scholars Den from publishing and broadcasting advertisements calling edtech company Physics Wallah "sasta wallah" (cheap one)..In the present suit, San Nutrition was represented by Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak and Advocates Kangan Roda, Abhishek R Tanishq Sharma and Chirantan Priyadarshan.Advocates Ramchandra Madan and Tushar Nigam appeared for the lead defendant, Arpit Mangal. Advocates Aditya Gupta and Aishwarya Kane represented Google while Advocates Varun Pathak and Yash Karunakaran represented Meta..[Read Order]