Authority: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction)

Order Date: 30 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Anup Kumar Satpathy, Divisional Railway Manager, East Coast Railway – Waltair, Visakhapatnam (aged ~53).
  • Respondents: Union of India (Ministry of Information & Broadcasting), State of Andhra Pradesh, Commissioner of Police (Visakhapatnam), Inspector of Police (Cyber Crime, Visakhapatnam), YouTube (Google LLC), Meta Platforms Inc / Facebook India, News Television Network Pvt Ltd (News 8 Odia).
  • Petition: Writ petition No. 37689/2022 under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 151 CPC, seeking a writ of mandamus or other appropriate relief to stop the telecast/streaming of fake news and morphed photographs linking the petitioner to an unknown blackmailer, and to compel respondents 5‑7 to comply with notices dated 26‑Oct‑2022.
  • Background: On 22‑Oct‑2022 FIR No. 507/2022 was lodged (offences under IPC §§ 469, 499, 500 and IT Act § 72). Notices were issued on 26‑Oct‑2022 to YouTube, Facebook India and News 8 Odia to furnish details of persons circulating the material and to delete the videos/URLs. The petitioner alleged that a person named Abhinna Satapathy used his photographs, voice recordings from 12‑Oct‑2022, and fabricated audio/video to extort money and to portray him as absconding from duty. The defamatory material was circulated on YouTube, Facebook and WhatsApp groups, causing widespread humiliation.
  • Specific Video: "Odisha is condemning Anup Satpathy II News8odia II Odisha" (YouTube URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k3yj5x7FQo). The petitioner requested its removal and prevention of re‑uploads.
  • Proceedings: The investigating officer submitted that the investigation is ongoing. The Assistant Government Pleader noted that News 8 Odia had not responded to police calls. Counsel for YouTube (respondent 5) stated the link had previously been removed but was repeatedly re‑uploaded by News 8 Odia.

Final Outcome

  • The Court, acknowledging the pending investigation, issued a direction to prevent further circulation of the disputed material while leaving the investigation to proceed.
  • Respondent 7 (News 8 Odia) is directed to remove the link(s) to the disputed video that are within its control and to refrain from re‑uploading or causing re‑upload through any of its accounts or channels.
  • Respondent 5 (YouTube/Google LLC) is similarly directed to remove any re‑uploaded copies of the material and to ensure it is not made available again.
  • The direction is limited to the specific disputed material and does not constitute a finding on the merits of the allegations.
  • The investigating officer may continue the investigation, pursue the requests already made to the online platforms, and take any further lawful steps. Respondent 7 must cooperate with the investigation and respond to lawful notices.
  • The writ petition is disposed of without any order as to costs; any pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

Topics: Defamation, Online Content Regulation