MUMBAI — The Bombay High Court issued an interim injunction restraining multiple media companies and digital platforms from publishing or disseminating untrue, sensationalized allegations concerning a landmark residential property in South Mumbai.
Presiding over the matter, Justice Arif S. Doctor observed prima facie that circulating unverified claims alleging the residence is "cursed" or "haunted" constitutes civil defamation and impermissibly infringes upon the property owner’s fundamental right to privacy and peaceful living.
Background of the Dispute
The lawsuit was instituted by prominent businessman Shashi Kiran Shetty (Shashi Kiran Shetty v. ScoopWhoop Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.). Shetty had legally acquired the prime real estate—formerly known as 'Aashirwad' and previously owned by late Bollywood actor Rajesh Khanna—before demolishing the old structure to erect a modern family residence while keeping its historic name.
According to the petition, various online publications, news organizations, and content creators continued to circulate articles and video reports branding the site as unlucky, attributing personal misfortunes of former celebrity occupants to the land itself. The plaintiff further alleged that media operatives engaged in unauthorized surveillance and long-lens videography of the private residence, disturbing the family's solitude.
Legal Arguments Advanced
Appearing for the plaintiff, Senior Advocate Birendra Saraf submitted that the respondents' coverage crossed the threshold of fair reporting into malicious falsehood and tortious defamation.
The plaintiff argued that:
- The defamatory characterizations created unwarranted public sensationalism at the expense of a private citizen.
- The intrusive photography violated the right to privacy implicit in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to live with dignity free from false public portrayals.
- Formal takedown notices issued to several media outlets and intermediary platforms (including Google and Meta) earlier in the year were ignored by most respondents.
Judicial Findings and Relief
Justice Doctor agreed with the petitioner’s contentions, noting that none of the non-compliant respondents appeared in court to justify the veracity of their content despite due service of notice.
"The material, in my prima facie view, is clearly defamatory of [the Plaintiff] so as to suggest that the Plaintiff lives in a haunted and so-called cursed bungalow. Furthermore, it would also clearly impinge upon the Plaintiff's right to live peacefully and in dignity," the Bench remarked in its order.
The Court held that generating revenue or traffic through sensationalism cannot override an individual's right to reputation and dignity.
Directives Issued
- Interim Injunction: The High Court restrained all named media defendants from printing, hosting, or streaming content alleging false or supernatural claims regarding the property.
- Content Removal: Intermediaries and publishers were directed to remove or disable access to the specific URLs listed in the application.
- Exemption: Charges against Rajshri Entertainment were withdrawn after its counsel confirmed the voluntary takedown of the disputed video.
The High Court adjourned the matter for further hearing on August 21.
Discription: MUMBAI — The Bombay High Court issued an interim injunction restraining media outlets and digital platforms from describing late actor Rajesh Khanna’s former residence, ‘Aashirwad’, as "haunted," "cursed," or "unlucky."
Presiding over Shashi Kiran Shetty v. ScoopWhoop Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., Justice Arif S. Doctor ruled prima facie that circulating unverified, superstitious narratives is defamatory and infringes upon the property owner’s fundamental right to live peacefully with dignity under Article 21.
The suit was filed by industrialist Shashi Kiran Shetty, who demolished the original structure to build a modern family home while retaining its iconic name. The Court ordered media entities and digital intermediaries to remove listed URLs hosting sensationalized content. The matter stands adjourned to August 21.