The Madras High Court recently ordered YouTuber Joe Micheal Praveen to Pay Rs 50 lakh as compensation to AIADMK spokesperson and trans activist Apasara Reddy, for posting defamatory material and videos against her on social media and YouTube. Apsara Reddy informed the Madras High Court that YouTuber Joe Micheal Praveen had made repeated defamatory posts against her.
On January 4, Justice N Sathish Kumar went through multiple such videos and posts that Apsara Reddy had submitted in the Court and noted that they were defamatory and had been posted online without any attempt on Praveen’s part to verify the truth.
Considering the submissions, the Madras High Court noted that the perusal of the entire defamatory statements especially the contents in the videos, which is also extracted in the plaint, the statements are nothing but malicious and defamatory touching upon the privacy of any individual. The court observed that merely because a person has a right to post in YouTube, he cannot cross his limit encroaching upon the privacy of others.
The High Court further underlined that though the publication is a right, such a right is subject to reasonable restrictions and cannot be encroached upon the privacy of others, adding that when such statements are surfaced, particularly in social media like YouTube touching upon the character, behaviour and personal life of any individual, it will have serious impact in that particular area.
The Court ruled that the very statements surfaced in the YouTube videos Ex.P.14, makes it clear that the same are objectionable and malicious statements have been made without any semblance of truth. Hence, such statements are defamatory in nature with malicious content, the court mentioned. Subsequently, in such a view of the matter, the Court said that the YouTuber is liable to pay the damages.
The AIADMK spokesperson said that several shows that she had been invited to for speaking and interacting with others were cancelled following Praveen’s defamatory posts against her.
She added that he had to undergo much stress and mental agony as a result and demanded Rs 1.25 crores from Praveen as damages.
The Court agreed that Praveen’s posts and videos had caused much damage and humiliation to Reddy. It added that though one had a right to post videos on YouTube, one could not encroach upon the privacy of others in the process.
The Court observed that the reputation of the plaintiff has been lowered to a level that many of the programmes of the plaintiff have been cancelled abruptly. It added that cancellation of such programmes abruptly is mainly because of the circulation of malicious contents in the social media and that it clearly indicates that though the damages cannot be certain, the plaintiff has to be compensated at least for a sum of Rs.50 lakhs.