The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ordered the removal of online content found to be infringing the personality rights of former India cricketer Yuvraj Singh, but refused to issue a blanket direction for the takedown of similar content that may appear in future, holding that every alleged infringement must be examined on its own merits.Granting interim relief, Justice Jyoti Singh directed that the URLs specifically identified in Singh’s suit be taken down. The Court, however, clarified that any future allegedly infringing content would have to be brought before it separately, after which appropriate orders could be passed if a case for violation of personality rights was made out.The Court further directed the individuals who uploaded the impugned content to remove the identified URLs within the stipulated period.It said that if they failed to do so, Singh would be at liberty to approach the concerned social media platforms and intermediaries for compliance with the Court’s order.Rejecting the plea for a broader injunction, the Bench observed that online intermediaries cannot be expected to determine whether future content is “similar” or “identical” to material already found infringing. Such an exercise, it said, involves adjudication and cannot be left to platforms.Singh, through Advocate Gaurav Bahl, submitted that several private parties were commercially exploiting his name, image and identity by selling merchandise without authorisation.It was also argued that content violating his personality rights continued to remain accessible on platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Flipkart and Amazon.The hearing also witnessed arguments over a Reddit post concerning Singh. Counsel for Reddit submitted that the platform hosted only one post relating to the former cricketer and that it had been online for over two years.Countering the submission, Singh’s counsel argued that although the post was old, users continued to add comments, resulting in a continuing injury.Reddit, however, contended that Singh’s grievance over comments on a post discussing his alleged views on women was essentially a case of defamation and not one concerning personality rights.The Court declined to enter that controversy at this stage, noting that the transcript of the post had not been placed on record. It orally observed that the necessary material should have been filed instead of leaving the Court to ascertain the contents of the post, and deferred consideration of that issue until the pleadings were complete.In support of his plea, Singh relied on earlier Delhi High Court orders safeguarding the personality rights of cricketers Abhishek Sharma, Gautam Gambhir and Jattvibeil Gavaskar, seeking similar protection.The Court granted the intermediaries three weeks to file their written responses. The matter is listed for further hearing on November 13.