Bombay HC Grants Ad-Interim Injunction Against Defamatory Social Media Posts Linking Jeweller to Foreign Influencer - 2026-06-02

Digital Reputation at Stake: Bombay High Court Issues Injunction Against Targeted Smear Campaigns

In a significant ruling concerning the intersection of corporate branding and social media accountability, the Bombay High Court has granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of major jewellery retailer Malabar Gold And Diamonds Limited . The order restrains various social media platforms from hosting defamatory content that attempted to link the reputable jewellery brand to a Pakistani Instagram influencer’s controversial political statements.

The Marketing Misstep and Viral Backlash

The dispute centers on a marketing initiative intended to promote Malabar Gold’s new showroom in Birmingham, United Kingdom. To connect with local demographics, the company engaged JAB Studios to procure the services of social media influencers. Among the recruits was Ms. Alishba Khalid, a UK-based influencer.

Unbeknownst to the brand, Ms. Khalid had previously—and publicly—condemned the Indian military’s surgical strikes during Operation Sindoor. Following the campaign, an orchestrated wave of social media posts began circulating, portraying Malabar Gold as a "sympathizer of Pakistan." The plaintiff argued that these posts were not organic fan reactions but strategically timed "defamatory materials" pushed by competitors to sabotage their business during the critical festive season.

The Legal Battle: Protecting Corporate Identity

Appearing for the plaintiff, Mr. Naushad Engineer argued that Malabar Gold had no prior knowledge of the influencer’s personal political stances and had, in fact, discontinued her services. The core legal contention was that a company cannot be held liable for the personal political views of a contractor hired for a professional purpose, particularly when those expressions occurred either before or outside the scope of their engagement.

The defense, represented by counsel for Meta Platforms Inc. and others, navigated the complexities of platform liability for third-party user content. The Court, however, showed little leniency toward the continued hosting of content that essentially served as a persistent smear campaign.

Key Observations from the Bench

The Court highlighted the lack of nexus between the brand's business activities and the influencer's political outbursts. In his observations, Justice Sandeep V. Marne emphasized the necessity of suppressing content that relies on such tenuous connections:

> "In my view, a case is made out for grant of ad-interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff for pulling down the posts, list of which alongwith URL is already provided at Exhibit-J to the plaint."

Regarding the future obligations of the platforms, the Court noted:

> "Defendant Nos.1 to 7 shall not permit publishing of any further defamatory material against the Plaintiff qua the arrangement made by the Plaintiff for engagement of Ms. Alishba Khalid as a social influencer to promote its products and business."

The Verdict: A Curb on Digital Hostility

The Bombay High Court’s ruling serves as a vital safeguard for businesses operating in the digital-first economy. By ordering the removal of 442 identified URLs, the Court has provided immediate relief to Malabar Gold .

Furthermore, the Court established a clear grievance mechanism: the plaintiff is tasked with identifying and submitting specific URLs containing similar defamatory material in the future. To maintain fairness, the order allows the platforms to flag concerns regarding individual URLs back to the plaintiff, who retains the liberty to approach the Court if a stalemate arises.

For now, this ad-interim mandate remains in effect until the next hearing on November 11, 2025, sending a firm signal that while social media remains an open forum for opinion, it cannot be weaponized as a tool for targeted, malicious corporate defamation.