“Justice N. Senthilkumar held, “… the plaintiff has only identified the second defendant with several links to the YouTube channels and other social media platforms. Absolutely, there is no material before this court except the photographs and the links. Merely furnishing the links and photographs will not be sufficient for the court to prima facie come to the conclusion that there is a violation of personality rights of the applicant/plaintiff and in the absence of any specific allegation made with regard to commercial gain to the defendants, the claim made by the applicant/plaintiff seeking an injunction is against the settled principles on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a).”” https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/madras-high-court/t-rangaraj-v-joy-crizildaa-defamation-personality-rights-article-19-1604292#:~:text=Justice%20N.%20Senthilkumar,19(1)(a).%E2%80%9D

by Sekar Reporter · Published January 13, 2026 · Updated January 13, 2026