Bombay High Court to Hear Nitin Gadkari’s ₹11 Crore Defamation Suit Over E20 Deepfakes on August 5
The Bombay High Court has scheduled for August 5 the hearing of Union Minister Nitin Gadkari’s ₹11 crore civil defamation suit against X Corp (formerly Twitter), Meta Platforms, Google LLC and unidentified individuals over the circulation of alleged AI-generated deepfakes and manipulated online content linking him to India’s E20 ethanol-blended petrol policy. The case is emerging as a significant legal battle over the misuse of artificial intelligence, online misinformation and the liability of digital platforms for hosting defamatory content.
Gadkari has asserted before the High Court that he had no role in framing, implementing or administering the Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme or the E20 fuel initiative. According to the plaint, the ethanol policy falls within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, while he serves as the Union Minister for Road Transport and Highways. He contends that social media posts falsely portrayed him as having personally influenced the policy and financially benefited from it, thereby damaging his reputation.
The suit alleges that AI-generated deepfake videos, manipulated images and fabricated social media posts falsely connected Gadkari and members of his family with companies purportedly benefiting from the ethanol blending programme. According to the minister, the content was deliberately designed to mislead the public into believing that he had a conflict of interest in promoting E20 fuel, despite having no decision-making authority over the programme.
Seeking ₹11 crore in damages, Gadkari has requested the High Court to issue a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from publishing or circulating the allegedly defamatory material. He has also sought immediate removal of the disputed content from digital platforms and directions requiring technology companies to prevent its further dissemination. The minister argues that the widespread circulation of the material has caused substantial harm to his public image and credibility.
Before the substantive hearing, the Bombay High Court granted Gadkari permission to institute the suit after considering jurisdictional issues arising from the fact that several defendants are located outside Maharashtra. Justice Abhay Ahuja allowed the minister to proceed with the civil action, while Justice Arif Doctor later adjourned the matter to August 5 to enable service of the plaint and supporting documents on all respondents, including Meta, X Corp and Google.
The case is expected to examine the responsibilities of social media platforms in dealing with AI-generated misinformation and defamatory content. Legal experts believe the proceedings could clarify the extent of intermediary obligations to remove manipulated digital material once notified, particularly where such content involves deepfakes and reputational harm. The litigation may also influence future standards governing platform accountability and the regulation of synthetic media in India.
With the matter now listed for hearing on August 5, the Bombay High Court is expected to consider Gadkari’s request for interim relief, including urgent takedown directions, while the defendant platforms are likely to present their responses regarding content moderation, intermediary protections and compliance with Indian information technology laws. The outcome could become an important judicial precedent on balancing freedom of expression with protection against AI-enabled defamation in the digital age.
