Delhi High Court Orders Congress, AAP & Others To Take Down Defamatory Posts Linking BJP's Dushyant Gautam To Ankita Bhandari Murder Case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (January 7) directed Congress party, Aam Aadmi Party and various others to take down allegedly defamatory publications from social media linking BJP's National General Secretary and former Rajya Sabha MP Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the Ankita Bhandari murder case. 

It further restrained various defendants from posting or circulating any content which names or targets Gautam as the VIP in the Ankita Bhandari murder case. 

The defendants in the suit are Urmila Sanawar, Suresh Rathore, Indian National Congress, Uttarakhand Pradesh Congress Committee, Ganesh Godiyal, Aam Aadmi Party, Alok Sharma, Mohit Chauhan, X account PMNehru, X (formerly Twitter), Meta platforms and Google LLC.

After hearing the matter for some time, Justice Mini Pushkarna in her order dictated:

"Issue summons in the suit from defendants 1 to 10 (Meta and Google excluded).Notice in application seeking interim relief. Defendants no 1-9 are restrained from posting or circulating any content which names or targets the plaintiff as VIP in the Ankita Bhandari murder. Defendants 1-9 are directed to remove various posts and videos uploaded on social media platforms namely Youtube, Instagram, Facebook and X. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, a prima facie case is made out by the plaintiff. Balance of convenience is in his favour and irrepearable injury would be caused to plaintiff if defendants 1-9 are not restrained from posting the defamatory content".

The court further said that in the event defendants 1-9 fail to comply with directions within 24 hours, defendants 10-12 (X, Meta and Google) are directed to take down the posts as per IT Rules.

"In addition to the aforesaid urls, plaintiff is at Liberty to inform defendants 10-12 about any other identical social media content which need to be taken off," the court added.

It further said that in case of any further identical social media content or URLs are informed to the social media platforms, the details shall be filed before the court.

In case the platforms are of the view that the identical posts are not covered by the court's injunction, they shall be at liberty to inform the plaintiff who shall be at liberty to approach court for appropriate order, the court added. 

Appearing for Gautam, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia submitted that Gautam's reputation has been maligned by persons and national political party which has millions of followers.

"No substance in allegations made. Obscene material, outside defamatory. I have asked for damages for 2 crore plus and interim prayers," he said. 

He further said, "There is one Urmila Sanawar, defendant 1. She posts a video stating a conversation she is having with defendant 2, Mr. Rathore, her husband. They say there was an unfortunate incident that happened in Uttarakhand. They are saying this young girl was asked to give VVIP service to plaintiff and when she refused, plaintiff and other office bearers are involved in murdering her. Very disturbing material. How they are maligning my reputation".

Bhatia said that the defamatory material is still there since the last 10 days which has been viewed by millions and shared by thousands.

"The news clipping mentions my name is publicised by her in addition to video itself. Urmila, what kind of criminal antecedents she has, is very relevant. Nine criminal cases against her. Some are of IT Act also. This is habitual offender who keeps on posting such material to sensationalize, without any evidence," he added.

Referring to Congress Party Bhatia said:

"An individual with 10k followers posting something is malicious but damage done is not of same magnitude when done by someone with greater following. Its a national political party. Are they not supposed to verify video and consult team and ask before posting material. A video surfaces, someone is paid, the other political party will pick it up. You maligned him. You took away his reputation. Then what happens?"

Arguing that within an hour million of views take place Bhatia said, "This is INC and I have seen video doing a press conference and sharing it on social media handles. Instagram alone has 11.4 million followers. Facebook, X and Youtube…. Transcript of video is played".

Reading to the transcript of the video Bhatia said that it was "outrightly defamatory" and the  video was harming Gautam's reputation.

"Assuming there was substance and they had evidence, they should have filed a complaint, go to magistrate. There is a law in place," Bhatia added. 

The court at this stage asked if Gautam had been named in the FIR to which Bhatia responded in the negative. 

Bhatia said that an Instagram reel has also been published.  

"Congress has started making allegations without any basis. Congress is saying 'ye khulasa hua hain'. Highest constitutional office of country and you are connecting it, on what basis? This is the respect you have for constitutional functionaries because of your cheap petty politics?," he added. 

He referred to another content published by INC and said,"There is picture of a former MP and a very imminent person (Gautam). And then naming him. Similarly, I have given list of all the reels, posts posted by INC". 

He sought that there should be immediate removal of all such material, including proxy material.

Referring to posts published by AAP party Bhatia said, "There are five posts which we could find. Similar pattern, they have politicised the issue, they put my picture with picture of deceased. Completely uncalled for, unsubstantiated and defamatory in nature. Its AAP Facebook post. Picture is of plaintiff and another constitutional authority, CM of the State. Is there any basis? Trying to do politics in Uttarakhand like this. This is a Facebook post, verified handle of a political party. Very disturbing".

Bhatia said that the party had done a press conference on this issue as well. 

Seeking interim relief Bhatia thereafter submitted that irreparable loss was already done and no amount of compensation can undo that. He further said that balance of convenience was in the plaintiff's favour. 

Meanwhile counsel appearing for Meta submitted that it was not contesting the plaintiff but was before the court to assist it. 

"If your lordships asks us to take down, we will. But there are some aspects. At first instance, your lordships directs the uploader to take down. If it is not done, then we are asked. These are political parties, this also constitutes free speech. That your lordships will consider. On the aspect of dynamic injunction, tomorrow if someone says there should be re investigation, that will also be covered. Your lordships may hear uploaders before dynamic injunction," the counsel said. 

The suit states that actress Urmila Sanawar, claiming to be wife of former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore, made statements on social media portraying Gautam as a “sexual predator” and insinuating that he was the person on whose account Ankita Bhandari was being exploited and ultimately killed.

It added that Rathore amplified the statements by describing an alleged “VIP” seeking “extra services”, which clear inference that the said VIP was Gautam.

Gautam has claimed that the whole exercise of circulating the allegedly defamatory and malicious videos and posts by the Defendants has been concocted and done in order to gain publicity, media coverage and political mileage, without having any credible basis and evidence to substantiate.

It is his case that there is no reference to him in the investigation record or any judicial finding which could support the allegations made against him.

He has said that the imputations are wholly baseless, unverified and contrary to the investigative and prosecutorial record of the Ankita Bhandari case.

Gautam has sought removal of the impugned content and Rs. 2 crores in damages. 

Ankita had been missing since 18-19 September 2022, after which her search began. Subsequently, the three accused were arrested on September 23, and when questioned by the police, they allegedly confessed to the murder. On their pointing, Bhandari's body was recovered from the Chilla canal in Uttarakhand's Rishikesh on September 24.

Pulkit Arya, the son of a former BJP leader and his two associates, Saurabh Bhaskar and Ankit Gupta, had been accused of killing 19-year-old Bhandari, as she had refused and resisted offering "extra services" to a VIP guest in a resort owned by Arya, where she worked as a receptionist.

The trial court in May 2025 convicted all the three men in the case. They have been sentenced to life imprisonment.

Title: DUSHYANT KUMAR GAUTAM v. URMILA SANA WAR & ORS