YouTuber CarryMinati Temporarily Restricted From Publishing Content Targeting Filmmaker Karan Johar
A civil court in Mumbai has issued an interim order in favour of Bollywood filmmaker Karan Johar, temporarily restraining popular YouTuber Ajey Nagar, better known as CarryMinati, from creating or circulating allegedly defamatory content about him on digital platforms. The order follows a defamation suit filed by Johar, who said that certain online videos and their subsequent circulation on social media were harming his reputation and goodwill built over many years.
The dispute centres on a roast video that Nagar had uploaded on his channel, which was reportedly modelled on Johar’s popular talk show. Johar’s legal team argued that the video contained obscene language and disparaging remarks about him and Bollywood, amounting to defamation. Although the original upload was reportedly removed, short clips and reposts continued circulating widely across social media, prompting Johar to seek urgent legal relief.
Principal Sessions Judge P.G. Bhosale heard the plea and found that, on the face of it, the statements made in the impugned content appeared to be “defamatory, vulgar and abusive” towards Johar. Based on this prima facie assessment, the court passed an ad-interim injunction, restraining Nagar, his manager and other associated defendants including their agents and any persons acting on their behalf from publishing, uploading, posting, re-posting, sharing or circulating any content that could be defamatory or objectionable towards Johar until the next hearing.
The order also directed digital platforms, including Meta and Google, to remove the identified video links and URLs flagged in Johar’s suit. By naming multiple defendants including network intermediaries and unnamed John Doe parties the court aimed to curb not just the original uploads but also the widespread reposting of potentially defamatory content.
In his legal filing, Johar maintained that the contested content damaged his reputation and was circulated despite its removal from the original source. His legal team emphasised that millions of views and repeated re-circulation of clips had already impacted public perceptions, warranting immediate judicial intervention. The plea was filed through the filmmaker’s production company, represented by a prominent law firm.
Nagar’s defence counsel argued that the contested videos and related material had already been taken down, suggesting there was no ongoing cause for further legal action. However, the court maintained that the continued circulation of the clips justified a temporary injunction against additional defamatory publications until full arguments are heard.
This legal development highlights broader issues of reputation management and digital content regulation in the age of social media, where content can circulate rapidly and widely, often beyond the control of original creators. The case will return to court as Johar’s application for interim relief undergoes detailed hearing and decision.
The dispute centres on a roast video that Nagar had uploaded on his channel, which was reportedly modelled on Johar’s popular talk show. Johar’s legal team argued that the video contained obscene language and disparaging remarks about him and Bollywood, amounting to defamation. Although the original upload was reportedly removed, short clips and reposts continued circulating widely across social media, prompting Johar to seek urgent legal relief.
Principal Sessions Judge P.G. Bhosale heard the plea and found that, on the face of it, the statements made in the impugned content appeared to be “defamatory, vulgar and abusive” towards Johar. Based on this prima facie assessment, the court passed an ad-interim injunction, restraining Nagar, his manager and other associated defendants including their agents and any persons acting on their behalf from publishing, uploading, posting, re-posting, sharing or circulating any content that could be defamatory or objectionable towards Johar until the next hearing.
The order also directed digital platforms, including Meta and Google, to remove the identified video links and URLs flagged in Johar’s suit. By naming multiple defendants including network intermediaries and unnamed John Doe parties the court aimed to curb not just the original uploads but also the widespread reposting of potentially defamatory content.
In his legal filing, Johar maintained that the contested content damaged his reputation and was circulated despite its removal from the original source. His legal team emphasised that millions of views and repeated re-circulation of clips had already impacted public perceptions, warranting immediate judicial intervention. The plea was filed through the filmmaker’s production company, represented by a prominent law firm.
Nagar’s defence counsel argued that the contested videos and related material had already been taken down, suggesting there was no ongoing cause for further legal action. However, the court maintained that the continued circulation of the clips justified a temporary injunction against additional defamatory publications until full arguments are heard.
This legal development highlights broader issues of reputation management and digital content regulation in the age of social media, where content can circulate rapidly and widely, often beyond the control of original creators. The case will return to court as Johar’s application for interim relief undergoes detailed hearing and decision.
Next Story