Mumbai court slaps contempt notice on Google CEO Sundar Pichai; here's why

In its defence, YouTube cited immunity under the Information Technology Act, arguing that defamation does not qualify as content that can be blocked under Section 69-A of the Act

A Mumbai court today issued a contempt notice against Google CEO Sundar Pichai. The notice pertains to YouTube’s failure to comply with a court order directing the removal of a defamatory video titled ‘Pakhandi Baba ki Kartut’. The video allegedly targets the Dhyan Foundation, an animal welfare NGO, and its founder, Yogi Ashwini.  

 

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court in Ballard Pier issued the notice on November 21, 2024. The matter stems from a Bombay High Court directive issued on March 31, 2024, which instructed YouTube to take down the contentious video.  

 

Case background 

Dhyan Foundation alleges the video contains defamatory and obscene material that has harmed the organisation’s reputation and that of Yogi Ashwini. Despite the court’s directive, the video reportedly remains accessible outside India.  

 

The Dhyan Foundation filed a contempt plea in October 2023, accusing Google of deliberately ignoring the court order. According to the NGO’s lawyer, Raju Gupta, Google has engaged in delay tactics, seeking adjournments without valid reasons while reputational harm continues.  

 

YouTube’s response

 

In response, YouTube has invoked its immunity under the Information Technology (IT) Act, stating that defamation does not fall within the categories of content that can be blocked under Section 69-A of the Act. However, the court has rejected these claims, stating that the IT Act does not prevent criminal courts from intervening in such matters, according to a report in The Times of India. The case has now been scheduled for its next hearing on January 3, 2025.

 

In a separate case, Google is under investigation by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) following a separate complaint from gaming platform WinZO. The tech giant has been accused of providing a significant competitive edge to daily fantasy sports (DFS) and Rummy applications while potentially hurting other real-money gaming (RMG) apps.