IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 578/2025 & I.A. 14235/2025 SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR. …..Plaintiffs Through: versus

$~21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 578/2025 & I.A. 14235/2025
SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR. …..Plaintiffs
Through:

versus
Mr. Sai Krishna Rajagopal, Ms. Disha Sharma, Ms. Deepika Pokharia, Mr.
Angad Makkar and Mr. Pushpit
Ghosh, Advocates
IGOR ISAKOV & ORS. …..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

CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
O R D E R % 14.10.2025
Submissions on behalf of Defendant No. 43
1. Mr. Ankit Parhar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Defendant No. 43 states that the said Defendant has complied with the interim order dated 30.05.2025 and taken down the infringing link set out at paragraph no.
46 (iii) of the said orders.
1.1. He submits that however, the said post would fall within the exceptional category of satire and therefore, the Court may consider exempting the sharing of the Basic Subscriber Information [‘BSI’] details.
2. Mr. Saikrishna Rajagopal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states on instructions that in view of the submissions that the infringing link is being taken down, the Plaintiff is satisfied with the compliance and does not insist on sharing of the BSI details. The said submission is taken on record.
3. He states that the plaintiff has sought the take down of this link since the user was using it for product promotion and commercial gain.
4. The compliance of Defendant No. 43 is taken on record and defendant no. 43 is exempted from sharing the BSI details.
Submissions on behalf of Defendant No. 44
5. Ms. Amee Rana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Defendant No. 44 states that the said Defendant as well has complied with the directions for take down of the infringing links as directed at paragraph 46(iv) of the interim order dated 30.05.2025.
5.6. She, therefore, prays that the said Defendant be exempted from the further appearance.
6. The compliance of Defendant No. 44 is taken on record.
7. Mr. Srikrishna Rajagopal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff is directed to serve a copy of the affidavit, directed vide interim order dated 30.05.2025 to the counsel for Defendant No. 44, who has entered appearance.
Submissions on behalf of Defendant Nos. 46 and 47
8. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra, learned counsel for the said Defendants’ state that they as well have complied with the directions at paragraph 46(vi) of the interim order dated 30.05.2025, and will file their compliance affidavit within one (1) week.
8.1. He therefore, prays that the said Defendants be exempted from further appearance.
9. The compliance of Defendant Nos. 46 and 47 is taken on record.
Exemption from appearance for Defendant Nos. 43, 44, 46
10. In view of the aforesaid submissions, Defendant Nos. 43, 44, 46 and 47 are exempted from further appearance.
11. In case, the Plaintiff requires any further directions to the said Defendants, it can seek issuance of the notice to the said Defendants through their respective counsels, who have already entered appearance.
Submissions on behalf of Defendant No. 45
12. Ms. Mamta R. Jha, learned counsel for Defendant No. 45 states that Defendant No. 45 has taken down the URLs as per the directions issued at paragraph 46(v) of the interim order dated 30.05.2025 and has also provided the BSI details to the Plaintiff.
12.1. She states that the Plaintiff has subsequently sought take down of additional URLs, which have also been actioned, and the BSI details will be provided within two (2) weeks.
13. In response, Mr. Srikrishna Rajagopal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that illustratively the Court may refer to the infringing link available on the platform of YouTube, placed on record at page 247 of the
Plaintiff’s document.
13.1. He states that the said link posted on the platform of the YouTube is a gross misrepresentation and falls within the category of misleading representation identified by Google Ads products in its advertisement policy.
13.2. He states that in view of the Rule 4(4) of The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021; Defendant No. 45 ought to endeavor to bring in place a technology, which identifies identical content so as to obviate a necessity of the Plaintiff to repeatedly approach the said Defendant for take down of identical contents. 14. In response, learned counsel for Defendant No. 45 states that Defendant No. 45 is willing to have a collaborative approach with the Plaintiff to address their concerns and will actively cooperate with the Plaintiff in taking down any further links pointed out to them.
15. 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.
16. In case, Defendant No. 45 has any technological limitations or reservations on this direction, it can take instructions and file an affidavit to that effect.
Directions to the plaintiff qua filing of amended memo of parties
17. The Plaintiff has now received the BSI details in compliance with the interim order dated 30.05.2025 and Defendant No. 45 has undertaken to provide the BSI details of the additional URLs within two (2) weeks.
18. After receiving the BSI details of the additional URLs from Defendant No. 45, the Plaintiff will file its amended memo of parties within four (4) weeks from today and affect service on the contesting Defendants through all permissible modes.
19. List the matter before the Ld. Joint Registrar (J) for service and completion of pleadings on 13.01.2026; the date already fixed.
20. List the matter before the Court for Case Management hearing on
25.02.2026.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
OCTOBER 14, 2025/rhc/MG