Nitin Gadkari angry over name being dragged in E20 petrol controversy: Bombay High Court approached against deepfakes and fake videos, know what big clarification the Union Minister gave on ‘Ethanol Blending’ policy

The ongoing controversy over 20 percent ethanol mixed (E20) petrol being sold at petrol pumps across the country has now turned into a legal battle. Amid complaints of technical glitches in vehicles and reduction in mileage, several AI-generated (AI) and deepfake videos were going viral on social media, in which Union Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari and his family were claiming to be getting financial benefits from this policy. Taking a strong stance on these misleading and defamatory claims, Gadkari has approached the Bombay High Court.

Bombay High Court approves action against social media platforms

Considering the seriousness of the matter, Justice Abhay Ahuja of Bombay High Court has given permission to Nitin Gadkari to file a civil suit against Meta, Google, X and other digital platforms. The petition demands that the court direct social media companies to immediately remove all fake, fabricated and AI-generated videos made against the Union Minister and his family. Gadkari’s lawyer told the court that his personality rights are being violated on a large scale on the internet.

‘E20 policy is of Petroleum Ministry, Road Transport Ministry has nothing to do with it’

The situation has been completely clarified in the petition filed in the High Court and the statement issued by his office in Nagpur. Gadkari pointed out that the ethanol blending (E20) program falls entirely under the jurisdiction of the ‘Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas’ and not under his Road Transport Ministry. He clarified that the decision to implement ethanol blending in a phased manner was a collective decision of the entire Union Cabinet. He or his family have no personal or financial involvement with this entire policy or its implementation.

Healthy debate welcome, but character assassination not tolerated.

The Union Minister’s legal team reiterated before the court that the purpose of this petition is not at all to stop the public from impartially discussing, criticizing or debating any policy. Every citizen has the right to review policy in a democratic system, but misusing AI technology to create fake facts and tarnish someone’s image is a legal crime. The court can soon hold the next hearing in this case and issue orders to block objectionable content.