Delhi HC Closes Pleas by Newslaundry, Ravish Kumar Against Centre’s Take-Down Orders After ‘Understanding’ With Adani Enterprise

The Delhi High Court on Friday, September 26, disposed of pleas filed by Newslaundry and journalist Ravish Kumar challenging the Centre’s take-down directions against their reports and videos on Adani Enterprises, after the parties informed the Court that an ‘understanding’ had been reached with the company.

A bench presided over by Justice Sachin Datta noted that, as per the understanding, the petitioners will not take down any material hosted on their websites or other intermediaries as existing at 12:00 PM on September 26, 2025.” He further recorded that in case any material has already been taken down, the same shall not be re-uploaded.

The judge clarified that the arrangement shall subsist only until the Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL)'s application for an interim injunction in the civil suit is decided.

Justice Datta also allowed the impleadment applications moved by Adani Enterprises in both matters and directed the petitioners to file amended memos of parties accordingly.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Saurabh Kirpal, appearing for Newslaundry, submitted that it would be appropriate for the status quo to continue until the interim injunction application is decided.

At this stage, Senior Advocate Anurag Ahluwalia, appearing for Adani, stated that instead of pursuing an appeal, Newslaundry and Ravish Kumar would move before the Senior Civil Judge to argue their application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC.

Disposing of the pleas, Justice Datta also recorded that the Union of India shall issue a corrigendum to the petitioners in light of the present order, while clarifying that nothing contained in the order shall be construed as an opinion of the Court on the merits of the matter.

Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, appearing for Ravish Kumar, informed the Court that a pending appeal had been decided by the district court a day earlier. He pointed out that, qua that appellant, the earlier gag order would not operate until the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC is adjudicated.

Notably, a Delhi district court set aside a Rohini court’s gag order that had restrained journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta from reporting on Adani, directing the trial court to pass fresh orders after hearing him on September 26. District Judge Sunil Chaudhary observed, “The appeal is disposed of accordingly and the appellant will not be liable to follow the order dated 06.09.2025 till fresh orders are passed by the court of the learned Senior Civil Judge upon hearing him.”

On Friday, journalist Ravish Kumar had approached the Delhi High Court, challenging a directive of the Central Government asking him to take down allegedly defamatory videos on his YouTube channel relating to the Adani Group and its companies. In his plea, filed through advocate Shantanu Derhgawen, Kumar contended that the order “strikes at the heart of press freedom, which is recognised as the lifeblood of democracy.”

Kumar argued that his content falls within the sphere of journalism protected by the Constitution, namely, investigations into matters of public concern, corporate accountability, and democratic oversight of powerful institutions. The petition seeks an appropriate writ quashing the impugned order dated September 16, 2025, and declaring it unconstitutional, ultra vires, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

A similar petition has also been filed by digital news platform Newslaundry, challenging a directive of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) seeking removal of content related to Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL). The plea assails an MIB communication dated September 16, 2025, which directed the platform to comply with an ex parte gag order passed by the Rohini District Court.

The order, dated September 6, was issued against journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and several others, restraining them from publishing allegedly defamatory content concerning Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) on websites and social media platforms. It was passed by Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh of the Rohini Courts in a civil suit filed by AEL. The company alleged that a sustained defamatory campaign by journalists, activists, and organisations had damaged its global reputation, disrupted projects, and shaken investor confidence.

Taking cognisance, the trial court registered the suit, issued summons to the defendants, and directed service through multiple modes, including registered post, electronic means such as WhatsApp and email, and dasti service.

The court further ordered: “The plaintiff is given opportunity to apply to intermediaries/concerned agencies with details of the URLs/posts/hyperlinks/articles on the basis of this order, and intermediaries/concerned agencies are directed to take down/remove the alleged defamatory articles/posts/URLs whereby the prima facie defamatory material is published against the plaintiff within 36 hours. However, they shall preserve the contents and record till further orders from this Court.”

The judge observed that AEL had established a prima facie case, with the balance of convenience in its favour, since further circulation of unverified content could deepen reputational harm and inflict irreparable loss on investors and stakeholders.

However, last Thursday, a Delhi court set aside the Rohini trial court’s sweeping restraint order that had barred journalists Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi from publishing allegedly defamatory reports against AEL. The appellate court stressed that broad pre-publication restrictions were legally unsustainable. It also noted that the earlier order effectively allowed the plaintiff to approach intermediaries for removal of material it considered defamatory. “An incorrect determination by intermediaries would bring those who have not complied with it in the teeth of contempt,” the judge remarked. Accordingly, the order was set aside, but its effect was limited to the appellants before the court. Instant petition will be taken up on Thursday, September 25, 2025

Case Title: Newslaundry vs Union of India, Ravish Kumar vs Union of India

Bench: Justice Sachin Datta

Hearing Date: September 25, 2025