Sukhwinder Kaur vs Google and others — Personality rights suit

Timeline

1. 3 Nov 2026Hearing

   Bombay High Court orders removal of obscene content in Radhe Maa's personality rights suit

   The Bombay High Court issued an order directing the removal of obscene content featuring Sukhvinder Kaur, alias Radhe Maa, following her plea to protect her personality and publicity rights.

   LiveLaw

   Explanation in simple terms

   What:

   The court ordered the removal of obscene online content featuring a specific religious figure.

   Who:

   The Bombay High Court issued the order for Sukhvinder Kaur, also known as Radhe Maa, against Google and others.

   When:

   Reported on 3 Nov 2026.

   Where:

   Bombay High Court, Maharashtra.

   Why:

   The court acted because Sukhvinder Kaur filed a plea to protect her personality and publicity rights.

   What it means:

   The platforms involved must now delete the identified content as directed by the court.

2. 25 Oct 2026News

   Bombay High Court Allows Godwoman Radhe Maa To File Personality Rights Suit Against Google

   The Bombay High Court has allowed godwoman Radhe Maa, whose real name is Sukhwinder Kaur, to institute a personality rights suit against Google and other respondents over allegedly defamatory online content. Justice Abhay Ahuja granted permission under Clause XII of the Letters Patent after accepting arguments that part of the cause of action arose within the court’s jurisdiction.

   Free Press Journal

   Explanation in simple terms

   What:

   The court gave Radhe Maa permission to start a lawsuit to protect her personality rights.

   Who:

   Sukhwinder Kaur, also known as Radhe Maa, is the person suing. Google and others are the respondents. Justice Abhay Ahuja is the judge who made the decision.

   When:

   Reported on 25 Oct 2026.

   Where:

   The Bombay High Court in Maharashtra.

   Why:

   The judge allowed this because part of the events happened in the court's local area.

   What it means:

   The lawsuit can now proceed in this court against Google and the other respondents.