DELHI: India’s fiercely competitive law-entrance coaching industry has landed in court, and a Delhi judge has wasted little time in drawing battle lines.

The Delhi high court on April 13th passed an ad-interim order in favour of Toprankers EdTech Solutions Private Limited, which runs the coaching platform LegalEdge, and Geetali Gupta, the student who secured All India Rank 1 in the Common Law Admission Test 2026. The order, passed by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, restrains LPT EdTech Private Limited, which operates under the name Law Prep Tutorial, from using Gupta’s name, images or identity in any form across digital platforms.

A topper, a turf war and a rejected sponsorship deal

Advertisement

The dispute has its roots in a familiar story: a prized student, two rival coaching firms, and a falling-out over who gets the credit. According to the plaintiffs’ submissions, Gupta was enrolled in LegalEdge’s Champions Batch I programme and had credited the platform publicly for her result. Her association with Law Prep Tutorial was, the court was told, limited to mock tests and a handful of classes.

Following the declaration of results, Law Prep Tutorial allegedly approached Gupta and her family with an offer to sponsor her five-year college fees in exchange for exclusive association. The family declined. What followed, the plaintiffs say, was a sustained digital campaign against LegalEdge and against Gupta herself.

Content published across YouTube, LinkedIn, blogs and other social media platforms included a video titled “CLAT 2026 AIR 1 Geetali Gupta Controversy Exposed” and a blog post styled as an exposé of the rivalry between the two firms. The plaintiffs alleged these contained defamatory statements accusing LegalEdge of fraud, unethical practices and making false claims about toppers. AI-generated and morphed images were also said to have been circulated, including material falsely associating Gupta with Law Prep Tutorial and depicting LegalEdge’s directors in a damaging light.

Advertisement

What the court found

At the prima facie stage, Justice Gedela found that the blogs, posts, reels and other material on record appeared disparaging and designed to damage LegalEdge’s reputation. The defendants, the court observed, had prima facie carried out a defamatory campaign using content that appeared to have been published wilfully. The use of Gupta’s name and likeness, including AI-generated material, was found unjustified, particularly given that she had publicly credited LegalEdge and had asked the defendants to stop using her name. The court noted pointedly that the student had been drawn into the dispute as a “pawn.”

The orders

Advertisement

The directions are sweeping. Law Prep Tutorial and associated persons are restrained from publishing, sharing or disseminating any defamatory or derogatory content against LegalEdge across any digital platform. They are further barred from using Gupta’s name, identity or images in any form, including AI-generated or manipulated content. They are also prohibited from deleting or tampering with any internal data or communications relating to the campaign.

Critically, Google and Meta, covering YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, have been directed to disable, block access to, remove or suspend all identified content within 72 hours of the order being uploaded. The case, numbered CS(COMM) 344/2026, is listed before the joint registrar on July 14th and before the court on August 24th. Toprankers was represented by senior advocate J. Sai Deepak, alongside Ankur Khandelwal, Ravi Vaswani and Anchit Oswal, briefed by Zentrum Law Partners.

The case is a sharp reminder that in India’s cutthroat test-preparation industry, the fight for a topper’s endorsement can end up costing far more than a college sponsorship ever would.

Advertisement