Delhi HC Directs Google to Use Tech Tools to Remove Content Breaching Sadhguru’s Personality Rights

The Delhi High Court has recently directed Google LLC to deploy technological tools to prevent the circulation of misleading or unauthorised content that infringes upon the personality rights of spiritual leader and founder of Isha Foundation, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, while hearing a plea filed by Sadhguru, asked Google to use technology to identify and remove identical or similar infringing content so that the plaintiffs are not repeatedly compelled to approach the Court for the takedown of such material.

“Having hearing the learned counsels for the plaintiff and Defendant No. 45, the parties are directed to have a mutual meeting, where the Plaintiff can specifically identify the contents, which falls within the exception of the policy of Google Ads itself and thereafter, Defendant No. 45 must make an endeavor to ensure that the identical or similar content is removed through its technology so as to obviate the Plaintiff’s onus of looking out for such URLs and further to obviate the necessity of the Plaintiff making an endeavor to identify such misleading representation and approaching Defendant No. 45 for take down” the Court said.

During the proceedings, counsel for Sadhguru argued that under Rule 4(4) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, Google and similar intermediaries are obligated to adopt technology capable of detecting identical or substantially similar infringing content.

In response, counsel for Google told the Court that the company was willing to adopt a collaborative approach and would cooperate with the plaintiffs to identify and remove any further infringing content.

Taking note of the submissions, the Court directed both sides to hold a mutual meeting to identify the offending links and instructed Google to ensure that “identical or similar content is removed through its technology” to prevent recurrence. The judge clarified that if Google faced any “technological limitations or reservations,” it could file an affidavit explaining its position.

Court also recorded compliance by several defendants who had taken down the infringing URLs in line with its earlier interim order of May 30, 2025, and exempted them from further appearance.

On May 30, the Court had passed a ‘dynamic+ injunction’ in favour of Sadhguru, restraining rogue websites and social media platforms from misusing his name, image, voice, and likeness for commercial gain.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee was then dealing with Sadhguru’s plea seeking a temporary injunction against the defendants described as unknown third parties restraining them from infringing upon his personality and publicity rights, including his name, likeness, image, voice, and any other aspects of his persona exclusively associated with him.

“Thus, in light of the violations already committed by the ‘rogue websites’ by unauthorized streaming of the plaintiff’s personality rights by using modern technology and AI tools to unauthorizedly morph and doctored the plaintiff no. 1’spersonality rightson the ‘rogue website’, this Court sees every likelihood that such ‘rogue website’ will continue to disseminate to the public without authorisation or license from the plaintiffs," the Court said

Taking note that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience tilted in his favour, the Court observed that interim protection was warranted against the continued misuse of his personality rights.

Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sai Krishna Rajagopal, Ms. Disha Sharma, Ms. Deepika Pokharia, Mr. Angad Makkar and Mr. Pushpit Ghosh, Advocates

Defendants Through: Mr. Ankit Parhar, Mr. Abhishek Kumar and Mr. S. Sethi, Advocates for D-43 Ms. Amee Rana, Mr. Vishesh Sharma and Ms. Prasidhi Agrawal, Advocates for D-44 Ms. Mamta R. Jha, Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Ms. Shruttima Ehersa, Mr. Rahul Choudhary and Ms. Himani Sachdeva, Advocates for D-45 Mr. Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra, Ms. Mrinmayee Sahu and Mr. Tribhuvan, Advocates for D-46 and D-47

Case Title: SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR. versus IGOR ISAKOV & ORS

Bench: Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Order Date: 14 October 2025