Delhi HC questions YouTuber Mohak Mangal's "defamatory language" in "extortion" allegations against ANI
ANI is seeking Rs 2.10 crore in damages, a permanent injunction against Mangal, and directions for him to stop using the agency’s trademarks and remove the allegedly defamatory video.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Delhi High Court on Thursday observed that a YouTube video by content creator Mohak Mangal contains defamatory language against news agency Asian News International (ANI) and directed his counsel to seek instructions on removing it. The video, published on May 25, accused ANI of extortion after it issued copyright strikes against Mangal for using its footage in his videos and allegedly demanded over ₹40 lakh to lift the takedowns, as per reports.
Justice Amit Bansal, hearing the defamation suit filed by ANI, remarked, “Takedown. Whoever is using this kind of language, take instructions.” He added that Mangal’s message could have been communicated in a “more civilised manner” and questioned how the YouTuber could justify the language used.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, appearing for ANI along with advocate Sidhant Kumar, argued that the video and accompanying social media posts were part of a coordinated campaign to malign the agency. “They are calling me thugs, extortionist, gunda, other expletives,” Sibal said, adding that the language used was per se defamatory and intended to vilify ANI and its founders.
According to Sibal, Mangal was not only using ANI’s copyrighted footage without permission but was also profiting from it by leveraging his YouTube channel, which has over 4.2 million subscribers. “He is using my content to earn money, puts my registered trademark, and has even included a fake conversation claiming it’s a recreation,” Sibal submitted. He also pointed to social media posts by comedian Kunal Kamra and AltNews co-founder Mohammed Zubair, who shared and amplified Mangal’s video, as part of a “concerted effort” to pressure the agency.
“There are live posts on YouTube calling for a boycott of ANI. Expletives are being used,” he told the court.
ANI is seeking ₹2.10 crore in damages, a permanent injunction against Mangal, and directions for him to stop using the agency’s trademarks and remove the allegedly defamatory video. It has also sought similar restraining orders against Kamra, Zubair, and others who have shared or commented on the video, accusing them of making “false, baseless and malicious statements” with the intent to damage ANI’s reputation.
Senior Advocate Chander Lall, appearing for Mangal along with advocates Nakul Gandhi, Mujeeb, and Tanish Gupta, argued that ANI had not followed due legal process and instead attempted to “extort” money from his client. “If they have a grievance against me, they can’t call me and say they’ll block my channel unless I pay,” he said.
Lall added that Mangal’s statements were in response to ANI’s actions and that his client must have some remedy, which included going public with his experience. However, Justice Bansal pressed Lall on how he would justify the tone and language used in the video. “You want to use videos without taking a license. Why would you come out with these kinds of statements?” he asked.
While maintaining that ANI must first prove copyright infringement, Lall was told by the court to limit his arguments to the issue of disparagement. Justice Bansal noted, “The videos on the face of it are disparagement.”
The court watched the video during the hearing and reiterated its concerns over the language used. It asked Mangal’s counsel to return with instructions on taking down or editing the content. The matter will be heard again today.
