Gaurav Bhatia (L) and Saurav Das (R)
A fresh political controversy has erupted on social media after CJP spokesperson Saurav Das shared an AI-generated image that purported to show BJP spokesperson and advocate Gaurav Bhatia making a controversial remark about influencer Swatantra Bharadwaj.
The image attributed a statement to Bhatia describing Bharadwaj as a “dimagi naxal” and alleging that he had “the poison of casteism” within him. It further purported to show Bhatia saying that the BJP had no connection with Bharadwaj.
However, the statement was not made by Bhatia. He publicly rejected the post as fake and directly confronted Das over its publication.
The episode has raised fresh questions over the growing use of AI-generated images in political discourse, particularly when fabricated material is presented in the format of an apparently genuine social media statement.
Das had shared the image through his official X account. Another CJP spokesperson, Ashutosh Ranka, also amplified the post, commenting that “Paw paw has disowned the rowdy ones.”
The post remained online until Bhatia responded.
Bhatia swiftly called out the image and demanded that Das remove it and issue an unconditional apology.
In a post on X, Bhatia described the material as fake and gave Das a 24-hour deadline to delete the post and apologise.
The warning turned the social media exchange into a more serious confrontation, with Bhatia indicating that the matter could have legal consequences if the demand was not met.
Das subsequently deleted the post.
But the deletion did not end the controversy.
After removing the post, Das acknowledged that the image he had shared had been generated using AI.
Bhatia then responded that deleting the post alone was not sufficient. He claimed that the post had been removed approximately 83 minutes after his warning but reiterated his demand for an unconditional apology.
Bhatia further warned that he would approach the police if the apology was not issued.
His response accused Das of attempting to spread propaganda before removing the material once challenged.
The episode therefore moved beyond a simple social-media dispute, with the BJP spokesperson indicating that he was considering legal action over the allegedly fabricated attribution.
The disputed AI-generated post emerged against the backdrop of a separate controversy involving Swatantra Bharadwaj and the CJP.
Bharadwaj had been facing scrutiny over an alleged assault involving CJP activist Nishu Azad’s father, Sanjay Azad, during protests at Jantar Mantar in June.
Delhi Police had registered an FIR in connection with the allegations. CJP leaders subsequently demanded action against Bharadwaj, including under provisions relating to attempt to murder and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The controversy intensified after Bharadwaj discussed the incident during a podcast and acknowledged attacking Sanjay Azad. However, he subsequently maintained that he had acted in self-defence after allegedly being attacked by a mob.
A video circulating on social media also showed Bharadwaj being attacked by a group of people, while Delhi Police personnel appeared to intervene and attempt to rescue him.
Another video showed Sanjay Azad speaking about the incident and saying that the injury to his head had been caused “unintentionally”, while challenging Bharadwaj to a one-on-one confrontation.
The latest episode has added another dimension to an already contentious political dispute.
Instead of merely arguing over Bharadwaj’s conduct or the Jantar Mantar incident, the controversy now centres on whether an AI-generated image was deliberately presented as an authentic statement by a senior political spokesperson.
The incident also illustrates the difficulty of distinguishing genuine social-media statements from fabricated material as AI-generated content becomes increasingly sophisticated.
In this case, the purported statement was attributed to Bhatia, who himself publicly denied making it. Das subsequently removed the post and acknowledged that the image was AI-generated.
The question of intent, however, remains separate from the fact that the material was removed.
For now, Bhatia has demanded an unconditional apology and threatened legal action if that demand is not met. The episode leaves the wider political controversy over Bharadwaj unresolved, while putting the spotlight squarely on the increasingly consequential use of AI-generated content in political battles.
