AI Defamation Row: Gaurav Bhatia Moves Delhi HC Against CJP Leaders
₹2-Crore Suit Alleges False Attribution, Reputational Harm and Attempts to Undermine Public Faith in the Judiciary
(By Syed Ali Taher Abedi)
New Delhi, September 8, 2026: BJP leader and Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia have instituted a ₹2-crore defamation suit before the Delhi High Court against the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and its office-bearers Saurav Das, Abhijit Dipke and Ashutosh Ranka.
The proceedings arise out of a social media post published on X, formerly known as Twitter, on September 5, shortly after the arrest of Swatantra Bhardwaj, who has been accused of assaulting a teenage CJP protester.
According to Bhatia’s plaint, the impugned post allegedly contained an AI-generated and fabricated statement falsely attributing to him remarks describing Bhardwaj as “dimagi naxali” and “jaatiwaadi.” Bhatia has maintained that he never made any such statement and that the publication was not a mere expression of criticism or disagreement, but an alleged attempt to create a false association between him and words that he did not utter.
“The impugned material was accompanied or associated with the photograph of the Plaintiff followed by a false fake statement, thereby creating an unmistakable and false nexus between the Plaintiff and the words content disseminated by the said Defendants,” the suit reportedly states.
Bhatia has contended that the publication was calculated to damage his reputation, professional standing and public image.
The suit further alleges that the defendants have repeatedly issued public comments and social media posts which, according to the plaintiff, go beyond legitimate criticism and are intended to lower the dignity and institutional standing of the judiciary.
Allegations of Institutional Denigration
The plaint makes specific reference to statements allegedly issued by Saurav Das concerning Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, particularly in relation to her decision not to recuse herself from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s challenge to the discharge of Aam Aadmi Party national convenor Arvind Kejriwal and others in the Delhi excise policy case.
Bhatia has also referred to a post concerning the incarceration of Umar Khalid, an accused in the larger conspiracy case arising from the 2020 Delhi riots. According to the plaintiff, the language employed in the post allegedly travelled beyond fair comment on a judicial order or proceeding and amounted to a broader attack on the judicial process itself.
The plaint reportedly alleges that Das, while projecting himself as the Chief Spokesperson or Co-convenor of an unregistered collective, had publicly endorsed an individual facing serious criminal allegations and portrayed the judicial process as permanently tainted.
Bhatia has further alleged that the defendants, operating under the banner of an association which claims to have no political affiliations and to be pursuing a cause “bigger than any party,” have systematically used social media to criticise and attack the judiciary in a manner that allegedly exceeds the permissible limits of fair comment.
The suit also refers to other publications which, according to Bhatia, employed highly pejorative comparisons involving judicial proceedings and outcomes, allegedly with the effect of provoking public outrage and diminishing respect for judicial institutions.
The matter, titled Gaurav Bhatia v. Saurav Das & Ors., places before the Delhi High Court questions concerning the boundaries of online political commentary, the legal consequences of allegedly fabricated or AI-generated content, and the extent to which criticism of the judiciary may remain protected as fair comment before crossing into actionable defamation.
