AIADMK MLA Jayaraman, son file Rs 1 crore defamation suit against YouTube channels

Chennai, May 29 (IANS) AIADMK MLA and former Deputy Speaker Pollachi V. Jayaraman, along with his son Pravin Jayaraman, has filed a Rs 1 crore civil defamation suit in the Madras High Court against eight YouTube channels and three of their guest speakers.

The suit alleges that the defendants made defamatory remarks linking the duo to the Pollachi serial sexual assault case, which led to public outrage and a high-profile trial.

The matter came up for hearing before Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy on Thursday.

However, the hearing was adjourned by a week at the request of a junior counsel representing the plaintiffs.

The court also recorded the appearance of advocate P.T. Perumal, who submitted that he would represent Nakheeran Gopal, editor of Nakheeran magazine and the first defendant in the suit.

In their plea, the plaintiffs have not only sought monetary damages but have also requested a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from making any future imputations - either directly or by suggestion - linking them to the sexual assault case. They have also demanded that the defendants bear the cost of litigation.

Two interim applications were also filed along with the main suit. The first seeks a temporary injunction against the publication of any content connecting the father and son to the case. The second requests the court to take down existing videos that allegedly carry defamatory content.

The videos in question were published between May 13 and May 15, 2025, and include content from YouTube channels such as Nakheeran TV, AranSei, Jeeva Today, Jambavan TV, Galatta Voice, The Debate, Tamil Nadu Now, and IBC Tamil.

The case has gained renewed public attention after a Mahila Court in Coimbatore delivered its verdict on May 13, sentencing nine individuals to life imprisonment for their roles in the serial sexual assault case that first emerged in 2019.

The High Court is expected to resume the hearing next week, as the legal battle unfolds over allegations that the plaintiffs' claim have tarnished their public image and caused emotional and reputational harm.

--IANS

aal/svn