Bombay High Court to hear Gadkari's plea against Meta, Google, X over AI deepfakes
The Bombay High Court will hear Nitin Gadkari's suit against Meta, X, Google and unknown persons over alleged deepfakes on August 5. The plea says fabricated AI posts on the ethanol policy damaged his reputation and falsely implied personal gain.
by India Today News Desk · India TodayIn Short
- Court asked Gadkari to serve suit copies on Meta, X and Google
- The plea seeks urgent removal of deepfakes and fabricated ethanol-policy posts
- Posts allegedly claimed Gadkari and his family profited from fuel policy
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday said it would hear on August 5 a suit filed by Union Minister Nitin Gadkari against Meta, X Corp, Google LLC and unknown persons over allegedly defamatory deepfakes and AI-generated posts linked to the ethanol policy.
In his civil suit, Gadkari has sought an immediate takedown of all fake and fabricated content and a permanent injunction against its circulation. He has said the posts falsely portray him as being personally responsible for the ethanol-blended fuel programme and allege that he and his family benefited financially from it.
A bench of Justice Arif Doctor directed Gadkari's advocate, Sandeep Ladda, to serve copies of the suit on the respondents. The plea said several fake, AI-generated and defamatory posts on the ethanol-blended fuel issue were available online.
According to the suit, unknown persons uploaded and circulated posts and deepfake content that wrongly linked Gadkari to the programme and made allegations against him and his family. The plea said this had caused irreparable harm to his reputation and personality rights.
The suit described the allegations in the online posts as "false, malicious and grossly defamatory without an iota of doubt" and said they were designed to create a misleading public perception against Gadkari. It also said the ethanol-blending programme and E20 policy are administered by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, and not by him personally.
The plea said it was not intended to stop fair public debate or bona fide comment, but argued that reckless and defamatory allegations had crossed the line of lawful speech. The court will now take up the matter on August 5.
- Ends