David Walliams was named as the celebrity facing allegations of sexual misconduct after losing his bid for a High Court injunction to keep his identity secret.

The children’s author and comedian was revealed on Tuesday as the man at the centre of an investigation by the Guardian and ITV News.

Several women accuse Walliams of “grooming” them when they were teenagers.

One woman described her alleged encounter with Walliams, when she was 15, as a “sexual assault”.

Former Britain’s Got Talent judge Walliams, known for appearing in comedy shows including Come Fly With Me and Little Britain, denies any wrongdoing.

The allegations against him were made public after an extraordinary High Court battle.

Walliams, who has sold more than 60 million copies of his children’s books globally, had sought an injunction against the two media organisations to prevent the publication of the claims against him.

He brought the legal action against Independent Television News (ITN), which produces news programmes for ITV, Channel 4, Good Morning Britain and Channel 5, and Guardian News and Media (GNM), publisher of The Guardian.

During a two-day trial in late October, the High Court in London was told by lawyers for the media organisations that the allegations they wanted to report involved the man’s alleged “abuse of power and status” to contact young women and try to engage in “inappropriate and exploitative sexual activities”.

Lawyers for Walliams, who could not be named, argued that the broadcast and publication of the claims against the TV star should not be allowed because of a risk that he would take his own life, after two previous suicide attempts.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the injunction bid last Tuesday.

He said: “The court did not determine whether the allegations, or any of them, were true, and the dismissal of the claim does not amount to approval of any publication the defendants may decide to make.”

He added the man would remain anonymous to allow any appeal bids to be lodged but this needed to happen by 4.30pm this Monday.

No appeal was made.

Mr Justice Nicklin also told how the man had repeatedly said he intended to take his own life if the allegations were published, and that this must be taken seriously.

He added these statements did not “establish that suicide is inevitable or that treatment cannot reduce the risk”.

In his full, 52-page judgment, the judge explained: “The injunction would not treat the claimant’s underlying psychiatric condition or eliminate his elevated baseline risk.

“The evidence does not identify a point at which publication would become safe merely through the passage of time.

“The relief sought would therefore be of uncertain and potentially indefinite duration.”

Sara Mansoori KC, for Walliams, had stressed that he denies the allegations of wrongdoing and that publication “would have a potentially fatal impact”.

She told the court in October: “The only reason they would not be fatal is because the claimant would be locked up and prevented from his desire to end his life.”

The barrister also said the claimant “has no intention of returning to public life”.

Gavin Millar KC, for ITN and GNM, said the case risks “dragging judges into assessing the causes of suicidal ideation, which are for professionals and not for a judge”.

He added: “The obligation falls on the hospital to keep him safe, and that’s that.”

He later said: “Plainly, the proposed publication would make a valuable contribution to a debate of public importance, about men using their power to be able to misconduct themselves against women in that area of society.”

* Samaritans can be contacted for free, day or night, 365 days a year, on 116 123, or visit samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.