Delhi court annuls injunction against media personnel in defamation suit concerning Adani
In a significant development, a Delhi court has partially set aside an ex-parte injunction against four journalists, Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi, regarding allegedly defamatory material about Adani Enterprises Ltd (AEL). The ruling, however, does not affect the injunction with respect to unnamed "John Doe" defendants and some journalists, which remains in place as of late September 2025.
The court's decision came after advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the four journalists, argued that the September 6 order contained no finding on whether the publications were defamatory. Ms. Grover also pointed out that most of the publications cited in the suit had been available in the public domain since June 2024.
The court held that the September 6 order was unsustainable as it was passed without affording the journalists an opportunity of hearing. The court observed that the veracity of the contested publications could not be determined at this stage, and whether the defendants can prove the truth of their articles would be a subject matter of trial.
The court remanded the matter to the senior civil judge with the caveat that the observations in the order were not to be construed as comments on the merits of the dispute. The court's ruling comes after Special Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh had earlier restrained nine journalists, activists, and entities from publishing or circulating "unverified, unsubstantiated, and ex facie defamatory" reports about AEL.
The injunction was sought in a defamation suit where AEL alleged a "coordinated defamatory" campaign to tarnish its reputation and disrupt its global business operations. The conglomerate's advocate, Vijay Aggarwal, claimed that the journalists were engaged in a malicious campaign against the conglomerate.
The Editors Guild of India expressed concern over the gag order, stating it risks chilling legitimate reporting and undermining the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. The Guild urged the judiciary to ensure that defamation claims were addressed through due process and not "one-sided injunctions."
It is important to note that the judge's ruling applied only to the four appellants before him and did not extend to the separate appeal filed by senior journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. The injunction also extended to other journalists and entities, including Newslaundry, The Wire, HW News, Ravish Kumar, Ajit Anjum, Mr. Thakurta, Dhruv Rathee, and satirist Akash Banerjee.
Copies of the notice were also sent to Meta and Google, placing responsibility on them as intermediaries to act under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The order also allowed the company to identify additional online material it considered defamatory, which intermediaries and platforms were required to take down within 36 hours.
The case underscores the delicate balance between protecting reputation and upholding freedom of speech and the press. As the dispute continues, it is hoped that the court will ensure a fair and just resolution for all parties involved.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
