New Delhi [India], October 14 : An advocate, along with others, has filed a civil suit against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee seeking damages from him. 
The complainants, who identified themselves as Hindu devotees, alleged that their religious sentiments were hurt by a video posted by Dhruv Rathee. In light of this, they prayed before the court to issue directions granting an interim restraint on Rathee from creating, uploading, or publishing similar content.
 
The complainants have sought damages of at least Rs 50 lakh. It is prayed that the amount of damages, if awarded, be deposited in this Court, to be utilised for the welfare, maintenance and upkeep of a mandir or mandirs of Bhagwan Shri Ram, Maa Sita and Bhagwan Shri Krishna, or for such other public or religious purpose as the Court may deem fit and proper. 
The complainant Amita Sachdeva has alleged in the suit that Dhruv Rathee is a well-known YouTuber and content creator operating the YouTube channel “Dhruv Rathee” with over 3 crore subscribers. However, in one video, Rathee has made ex facie false, selective, misleading and highly offensive statements about Maryada Purushottam Bhagwan Shri Ram, Sita Maa, and Yogeshwar Bhagwan Shri Krishna. 
It is also alleged that the said statements, published in a permanent form on a widely accessible platform, are defamatory in nature as they are calculated to lower the dignity, sanctity, reputation and Maryada of Bhagwan Shri Ram, Sita Maa, and Yogeshwar Bhagwan Shri Krishna in the estimation of members of society, and thereby directly lower the reputation, religious identity, standing and self-esteem of the Plaintiffs as their devotees.
District Judge Mohinder Virat took up the matter on Wednesday and listed the matter for consideration on November 5. Advocate Makrand D Adkar appeared for the complainant.
Advocate Amita Sachdeva and others are seeking a grant of an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Dhruv Rathee, his agents and persons acting on his behalf, from creating, publishing, uploading, sharing, disseminating, or communicating the video titled “Can Hindus Eat BEEF?  or any video identical to or similar in content, on the internet or any other media, during the pendency of the present suit.
The complainants have also sought to grant an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Google from restoring, hosting, uploading, sharing or disseminating the said video, or any video identical to or similar in content, after notice and verification of the URL, during the pendency of the present suit.
It is also prayed for a direction to Rathee to forthwith remove and delete the said video from his YouTube channel and every account under his control, and to take down every copy uploaded by him or at his instance.
The complainant has also sought a direction to Google to forthwith remove and disable access, including in India, to the said video and to every identical or similar re-upload whose URL is disclosed or hereafter notified by the Plaintiffs during the pendency of the suit.