Bombay HC restrains activists from posting defamatory content on SII, Covishield

The Bombay high court on Monday restrained social media influencers from posting allegedly defamatory content about the Serum Institute of India (SII) and its chief executive officer (CEO) Adar Poonawalla and their Covid-19 vaccine, Covishield. The order was passed in an interim application filed by SII in a defamation suit seeking ₹100 crore in damages from social media influencers Yohan Tengra and Ambar Kori for allegedly posting objectionable content regarding Covishield.

Holding that the statements posted by the two regarding the side effects of the vaccine were prima facie defamatory, a single judge bench of justice Riyaz Chagla directed the two to take down the content they had posted on Twitter and YouTube.

Justice Riyaz Chagla had on February 13 reserved his order on the interim application, which sought an apology from and injunction against Tengra and Kori from making misleading comments about the effects of Covishield vaccine.

“Having considered the contents, the statements are prima facie defamatory...There is no justification (for making the comments). Defendants (Tengra, Koiri and others) are restrained from publishing defamatory content and are directed to remove the content published by them on websites or social media accounts,” the court said.

The court also declined to hear an application by Tengra and Koiri seeking directions against Poonawalla and other directors of SII for allegedly misleading the court by submitting false facts about the side effects of the vaccine in their affidavit.

SII approached the high court in October 2022 with a suit claiming that Tengra and Koiri had initiated a smear campaign against the firm by publishing defamatory posts, articles and videos regarding Covishield vaccine and sought ₹100 crore as damages along with an unconditional apology from the duo and others. The suit also sought directions to Twitter and YouTube to take down the defamatory content and ensure that no such content was published in future.

The firm claimed in its suit that the content posted by the individuals about the cause of multiple deaths being due to the side effects of the vaccine was not only targeted at SII but also Poonawalla as the posts termed them as criminals and murderers.

The advocates for the defendants, however, argued that studies had shown that the vaccine increased the risk of death and cancer due to which 21 countries in Europe had banned its use, but the firm failed to disclose this fact in its affidavit submitted in the HC.

The bench, however, ruled in favour of SII and imposed restraint on the activists.