Karan Johar vs CarryMinati: Roast Video That Sparked a Defamation Battle in Mumbai Court

CarryMinati aka Ajey Nagar is back in the headlines, but this time not for a brand deal or any content promotion. Karan Johar has taken legal action against him over a roast video that he claims crossed the line from satire to defamation. A Mumbai civil court has now granted interim relief in Johar’s favour, directing the removal of allegedly “vulgar and abusive” content and restraining further circulation. The case has reignited the long-running debate around roast culture, free speech, and reputational harm in the digital age.

Here is everything you need to know.

What Triggered the Legal Battle?

The controversy began after CarryMinati uploaded a roast video titled Coffee With Jalan, widely believed to be inspired by Karan Johar’s celebrity talk show Koffee With Karan.

According to Johar’s legal team, the video:

• Used abusive and vulgar language
• Made disparaging remarks about Bollywood and nepotism
• Targeted Johar personally
• Harmed his reputation and goodwill built “painstakingly over decades”

The roast allegedly mocked Johar while addressing nepotism culture in Bollywood, an issue the filmmaker has faced criticism for in the past.

Although CarryMinati’s counsel stated that the video had already been voluntarily deleted, Johar’s side argued that clips continued to circulate online in the form of reels and reposts, reaching millions.

Also read: ‘Beast Games’ Season 2 to Feature CarryMinati

Who All Were Named in the Suit?

The case, titled Karan Johar v. Ajey Nagar & Ors, named multiple defendants, including:

• Ajey Nagar (CarryMinati)
• Deepak Char (his manager)
• One Hand Clap Media Pvt Ltd
• Akshay Gajra
• Poptech Growth Private Limited
• Google (YouTube)
• Meta Platforms (Instagram, Facebook)

Johar was represented by DSK Legal, including advocates Pradeep Gandhi, Parag Khandar, Anaheeta Verma, and Pratyush Dhodda.

What Did the Court Say?

On February 9, 2026, Civil Judge P G Bhosale heard the matter and passed an ad-interim ex parte order.

The court observed that there was a prima facie case of defamatory and vulgar language being used against the plaintiff.

The order temporarily restrains the defendants and any associated parties from:

• Uploading or re-uploading similar content
• Posting defamatory remarks
• Circulating or re-circulating clips
• Publishing interviews or communications targeting Johar

Meta and Google were directed to remove the flagged videos and URLs. The court also issued John Doe orders to cover unidentified individuals who might attempt to circulate the content further.

Interestingly, while granting interim relief, the court noted that it may lack jurisdiction to fully adjudicate the matter, leaving room for future legal developments.

CarryMinati’s Defence

Appearing for Ajey Nagar, advocates Vikas Khera, Kukreja, and Alpna Mishra argued that:

• The original video had already been deleted voluntarily
• There was no surviving cause of action
• The court lacked jurisdiction
• Nagar had sought seven days to verify the claims before filing a response
• Johar rushed to file the suit without allowing clarification

They maintained that since the content had already been taken down, further legal proceedings were unnecessary.

However, Johar’s team countered that reputational damage had already occurred due to widespread circulation.

Legal Clash Beyond One Video

It raises serious questions about:

• The limits of roast culture
• Free speech versus defamation
• Platform accountability
• The viral nature of digital harm

CarryMinati is one of India’s most influential YouTube creators, with over 45 million subscribers. What started as a gaming channel evolved into commentary and roast-style content layered over gameplay footage. His aggressive humour and satirical tone have brought both massive popularity and recurring controversy.

For Johar, this case represents a line being drawn. His legal team emphasised that his reputation has been built over decades in the film industry and cannot be casually ridiculed under the guise of satire.

CarryMinati’s Past Roast Controversies

This is not the first time CarryMinati’s roast-style videos have stirred debate. Over the years, several instances have triggered backlash:

1. YouTube vs TikTok: The End (2020)
   • Video targeting TikTok creators went viral.
   • It was later taken down by YouTube for violating harassment policies.
   • Sparked national debate on cyberbullying and creator responsibility.
2. Targeted Celebrity Roasts
   • Several roast videos aimed at influencers and public figures led to online wars.
   • Critics argued that humour often blurred into personal attacks.
3. Content Moderation Clashes
   • YouTube’s takedown actions in the past triggered massive fan mobilisation.
   • The “justice for Carry” trend once dominated Indian social media.
4. Offensive Language Allegations
   • Repeated criticism over vulgar or aggressive language used in videos.

While roast culture thrives on exaggeration and provocation, the Johar case signals that mainstream film personalities are increasingly willing to test legal remedies.

Roast Culture vs Defamation Law

In India, defamation laws allow individuals to seek civil remedies if statements harm their reputation. Courts often examine:

• Intent
• Context
• Language used
• Whether satire crosses into false allegations

The Mumbai court’s observation that the language appeared “vulgar and abusive” suggests that the threshold for intervention may have been met at least at the interim stage.

However, whether the matter proceeds further or is settled remains to be seen.