- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Delhi High Court Seeks Google’s Response In Aaradhya Bachchan's Petition Against Misleading Health Videos

Delhi High Court Seeks Google’s Response in Aaradhya Bachchan's Petition Against Misleading Health Videos
The Delhi High Court on Monday sought a response from Google regarding a petition filed by Aaradhya Bachchan, seeking to restrain and remove misleading content related to her health. Aaradhya, the daughter of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, requested the court to decide her petition without hearing the YouTube channels that had not responded to her plea.
Justice Mini Pushkarna issued a notice on Aaradhya's application, which sought to proceed ex-parte, as the defendants were not appearing in the case. She also requested a decree to be passed in her favor. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on March 17.
A "summary judgment" application was filed in a pending lawsuit by Aaradhya and her father. In an interim order passed on April 20, 2023, the court restrained multiple YouTube channels from publishing misleading content about Aaradhya's health, condemning the spreading of disinformation about a child as "morbid perversity." The court also directed Google to remove certain videos from its platform, which falsely claimed that Aaradhya was "critically ill" and "no more."
Summons were issued to the YouTube channels, including "Bollywood Time," "Bolly Pakora," "Bolly Samosa," and "Bollywood Shine," as the court found a prima facie case for granting interim relief to prevent further harm. The plaintiffs argued that the videos, which made false claims about Aaradhya's health and personal life, tarnished the Bachchan family name—an entity they claimed was "protectable as a trademark" and represented the highest virtues. The videos violated Aaradhya's privacy and were designed to shock viewers, gain attention, and profit at the family's expense.