'Can Hindus Eat Beef? BJP IT Cell Part 2': Dhruv Rathee faces two defamation cases

Rathee has been served fresh summons in a 2018 criminal defamation case.

NEW DELHI: YouTuber Dhruv Rathee is facing two separate legal proceedings in Delhi. A fresh defamation suit has been filed against him at the Saket court over a video allegedly claiming that Lord Ram and Goddess Sita consumed meat and alcohol during their exile.Separately, Rathee has been served fresh summons in a 2018 criminal defamation case filed by BJP IT Cell member Vikas Pandey over a video titled "BJP IT Cell Part 2".

Fresh suit over Ram-Sita video

Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Amita Sachdeva and other petitioners had approached the Delhi high court over the video titled “Can Hindus Eat BEEF? and prayed before the court to issue directions granting an interim restraint on Rathee from creating, uploading, or publishing similar content."Some time ago, Dhruv Rathee published a video claiming that Lord Shri Ram and Mother Sita consumed meat and alcohol during their exile. We took the matter regarding that video to the Delhi High Court, and the Delhi High Court directed the Govt of India to have the video removed.""On July 15, 2026, the Govt of India directed YouTube to take down the video, after which that petition was disposed of. Following the disposal of the petition, someone extracted a three-minute segment from that 21-minute video and re-uploaded it,” she added.

According to Sachdeva, the petitioners approached the Delhi High Court again, which granted them liberty to initiate fresh legal proceedings against Rathee."We approached the Delhi High Court again. The Court granted us the liberty to file a fresh petition or suit against Dhruv Rathee and seek appropriate relief. Acting on that liberty, we filed a suit today in the Saket Court, before the Learned District Judge, seeking a declaration, an injunction, and damages for defamation; the matter was listed for hearing today," she said.Sachdeva said the petitioner's senior counsel, Makarand Natkar, appeared through video conferencing but could not complete his submissions because of technical difficulties. The court subsequently adjourned the matter to November 5."Today, my senior counsel, Makarand Natkar, presented his submissions. He appeared via video conferencing (VC), but due to some technical issues with the VC connection, the submissions could not be completed.

Consequently, the Learned District Judge adjourned the matter to November 5, when we will present our fresh submissions," she added.The complainants, who identified themselves as Hindu devotees, alleged that the video hurt their religious sentiments. The suit also seeks an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Google from restoring, hosting, uploading, sharing or disseminating the video, or any video identical or similar in content, after notice and verification of the URL, during the pendency of the suit.

Fresh summons in 2018 defamation case

Separately, a Delhi court has issued fresh summons to Rathee in a defamation case filed by BJP IT Cell member Vikas Pandey in 2018. The court noted that attempts to serve Rathee had continued for several years.Judicial Magistrate Rahul Jain was hearing Pandey's plea seeking fresh summons. In an order dated October 12, the court said, "From the available record, it is clear that the complainant has been trying to serve the accused no.

1 (Rathee) since the last several years..."Appearing for Pandey, advocate Samaksh Sharma submitted that Rathee ordinarily resides in Austria and had come to India for the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protests in Delhi. He argued that fresh summons were necessary to ensure prompt steps could be taken to serve the accused.The court permitted fresh summons to be served through dasti service, allowing the complainant to accompany the process server.

Rathee has since been physically served at his Gurugram residence. The proceedings had remained pending amid unsuccessful attempts to serve him since 2019.Speaking about the notice served on Rathee, Pandey said, "The court summons has been pasted outside Dhruv Rathee's home because he was not coming out. This stems from eight years ago when Dhruv Rathee created around three videos alleging that I offered Rs 50 lakh to someone to spread fake news against him.”“When Arvind Kejriwal amplified this fake news by tweeting and retweeting it, I filed a case against both Kejriwal and Dhruv Rathee. While Arvind Kejriwal offered an apology, Dhruv Rathee never appeared before the court. Consequently, a notice and summons were issued, which my lawyer pasted outside his Gurugram home..." he added.

The case also reached the Supreme Court in connection with a retweet of the video by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal.

In February 2024, Kejriwal told the apex court that he had made a mistake by retweeting it.The cases come days after Delhi and Gurugram Police detained Rathee at his Sector 56 residence in Gurugram on October 10, ahead of his planned participation in a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar. He was released after around 22 hours.The detention took place amid protests in Delhi led by the CJP, which has been demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The protests saw extensive security arrangements, barricading, traffic restrictions and the detention of protesters.