Delhi HC Temporarily Restrains Telugu Actor Manoj Manchu From Making Defamatory Statements About Media Professional Vinay Maheshwari
Sanjana Dadmi
1 Jan 2025 12:00 PM IST
The Delhi High Court recently directed Telugu actor Manoj Manchu and few media houses to take down tweets, posts, articles and videos containing defamatory statements against Vinay Maheshwari, a media professional who has held leadership positions in organizations such as Dainik Bhaskar Group, Sakshi Media Group and India TV.
The court further granted an interim order temporarily restraining Manchu from making any defamatory statements about Maheshwari on social media and in any public forum.
Maheshwari–who is stated to be a well-known professional in the fields of media, entertainment, and business, having established a distinguished career spanning over 27 years in corporate and entrepreneurial ventures–alleged that Manoj Manchu (defendant no. 1), his father and brother made defamatory allegations against him on social media platform X (previously Twitter), accusing him of manipulation, fabrication and financial irregularities. He alleged that Manchu fabricated a false narrative involving property demands and tarnished his reputation.
It was alleged by the plaintiff, that Manchu's tweets also conveyed that Maheshwari played a divisive role in the family feud between Manoj Manchu and other members of the Manchu family.
It was stated that these allegations were further disseminated by various digital media platforms including ordered GreatAndhra.com, IndiaGlitz, ABP Network Pvt. Ltd., Onmanorama and TeluguOne (Defenadant No. 6, 7,8,10 and 11) and social media users, portraying Maheshwari as a central figure in the family feud.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma opined that Manchu Manoj's tweets were prima facie defamatory. The court stated that the tweets with unsubstantiated allegations harmed Maheshwari's reputation and caused loss of his goodwill. It said:
“Insofar as the merits of the present case are concerned, the Defendant No.1 (Manchu Manoj) has allegedly through tweets published on 09.12.2024, and 13.12.2024, accused the Plaintiff of fabricating lies, engaging in manipulative behavior, and targeting his family members to further an alleged agenda. These tweets, published on the platform of Defendant No.3, specifically claim that the Plaintiff was involved in financial irregularities and exploitation at Mohan Babu University. The tweets further allege that the Plaintiff played a divisive role in the family feud between Defendant No.1 and other members of the Manchu family and used media expertise to fabricate narratives against Defendant No.1.These statements, made without any substantiation, are prima facie defamatory, as they allege unethical and illegal behavior, harming the Plaintiff‟s professional reputation and personal standing. The allegations of malicious intent and interference in family matters portray the Plaintiff in a negative light, leading to a significant loss of goodwill and public trust.”
It also found that the articles of media houses to be defamatory in nature.
One article published by GreatAndhra.com stated that Maheshwari manipulated financial management within actor Mohan Babu's institutions, collaborated with actor Manchu Vishnu to sideline Manoj, and exploited Manoj's marriage issues for personal advantage.
Finding that the allegations in the article were not corroborated, the Court remarked, “These assertions, relying on anonymous sources without factual corroboration, portray the Plaintiff as manipulative and divisive, harming his professional credibility and personal integrity.”
Further, IndiaGlitz had published an article which stated that Maheshwari acted as an intermediary between Manchu Vishnu and Manchu Manoj and was involved in physical confrontations and disputes over property. It also accused him of financial irregularities at Mohan Babu University.
Noting that the article was based on mere speculation, the Court observed, “These defamatory statements, based on speculative and unverified sources, falsely link the Plaintiff to violence and unethical practices. By portraying the Plaintiff as a central figure in the family conflict and associating him with financial misconduct, the article damages his reputation and professional credibility, causing public mistrust and personal humiliation.”
The Court thus found that a "prima facie" case for the grant of an "ad interim ex-parte injunction" was made out. It stated that the statements made by Manoj Manchu and media houses were prima facie made to create a sustained and defamatory narrative against Maheshwari. It stated that the statements made tarnished his reputation and also encouraged media platforms and other people to spread the defamatory content.
The Court issued temporary injunction against Manoj Manchu, restraining him from tweeting, posting or sharing any defamatory statements on Maheshwari and his family on any social media platform.
"Defendant No. 1, or anyone acting on its behalf, is temporarily restrained from making, posting, tweeting, reposting, sharing, or sending any defamatory statements concerning the Plaintiff and his family on any social media platform, messenger service, or public forum," it said.
It also directed Manoj Manchu to remove his previous tweets on Maheshwari within one week of the court's order. The Court further ordered the media houses GreatAndhra.com, IndiaGlitz, ABP Network Pvt. Ltd., Onmanorama and TeluguOne to remove the defamatory articles.
With these directions, the Court issued notice to the defendants and posted the matter on February 17, 2025.
Counsel For Plaintiff: Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit Jain, Mr. Avinash Kumar Sharma, Mr. Aslam Ahmad, Ms. NehaKhanduri and Ms. Komal Sharma, Advocates (Singhania & Co.)
Counsel For Defendants: Mr. Aditya Gupta and Ms. Asavari Jain, Mr. Amit Bajaj, Advocates
Case title: Vinay Maheshwari vs. Manoj Manchu & Ors. (CS(OS) 1008/2024)
