Delhi High Court: In an application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, wherein the plaintiff (‘Astrologer Trishla Chaturvedi’) had sought permanent and mandatory injunction against Defendant 1 (‘Astrologer Umang Taneja’) to restrain him from posting videos and posts defaming plaintiff, the Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J, held that videos and posts in question were defamatory in nature and their continued presence would cause irreparable harm and injury to plaintiff’s reputation. Therefore, the Court ordered them to be taken down within 48 hours of service of the order.
The Plaintiff, Trishla Chaturvedi, is a practitioner of Vedic astrology with over 20 years of experience in the field. She is also the recipient of ‘Jyoti Vibhushan Award’ in 2016 and 2017 and the ‘Sarvashreshth Jyotish Puraskar’ in 2016. Trishla Chaturvedi also maintains a YouTube channel with over 1.29 million subscribers.
The defendant 1, Umang Taneja, is also a practitioner of astrology. As per the petitioner, defendant 1regularly posts defamatory videos against various parties and has been held guilty of criminal defamation in the past as well.
Upon perusal of the defamatory material placed before it, including several videos posted by defendant 1 on YouTube and Instagram titled ‘Trishla Maa Ka Sangharsh- 10 Hazaar Har Varsh’ and ‘Chutki Sindoor Par Bhaari Chutki Namak’, the Court opined that the contents of the videos posted were, prima facie, derogatory in nature. The videos sought to malign the reputation of the plaintiff by accusing her of performing black magic and further portraying her as a drug abuser by morphing a photograph. Another video by defendant 1 referred to the plaintiff as a ‘cheap guest’ with the intent to tarnish her image.
Thus, the Court held that a prima facie case was made out against defendant 1 and that the continued presence of such defamatory content against the plaintiff would cause irreparable harm and injury to her reputation.
The Court directed Defendant 2 and 3 to take down the defamatory videos and posts within 48 hours from the service of the order and restrained defendant 1 from posting any defamatory videos and posts in relation to the plaintiff till the next date of hearing
The matter was further listed for 20-1-2026.
[Trishla Chaturvedi v. Umang Taneja, CS(OS) No. 613 of 2025, decided on 4-9-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Plaintiff: Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate, Aditya Trivedi, Shivani Mishra, Ritik Raghuwanshi, Advocates.
For the Defendant: Aditya Gupta, Vani Kaushik, Advocates