Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court, recently, granted an injunction in favor of The New Indian against defamatory posts published on Twitter (X) concerning an interview of Prime Minister Modi during the general elections 2024. The post insinuated that the editor-in-chief of the news was biased while also insinuating that the New Indian was beholden to one political party.

The bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan held, “In the absence of any evidence to justify the allegations made in these posts by the defendant nos. 1 – 3, the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case for grant of ad interim order of injunction against the defendant nos. 1 – 3. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiffs. I am satisfied that the plaintiffs would suffer an irreparable loss and injury, if an ad interim order of injunction against the defendant nos. 1 – 3 is not granted”. 

A suit was initiated by the Editor-In-Chief of The New Indian, seeking a permanent and mandatory injunction against Sanjay Sharma Editor-in-Chief of 4 PM Evening Newspaper alleging that he had uploaded various posts on the micro-blogging website ‘X’ (defendant no. 4) containing defamatory allegations against Rajatarangini India Media.

Advocates Raghav Awasthi and Mukesh Sharma, representing the New Indian, submitted that during the 2024 general elections, they had interviewed Narendra Modi, the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India. It was submitted that they had uploaded a post on the micro-blogging website ‘X.’  Following the upload of the aforementioned post, Sanjay Sharma had attacked the New Indian by replying to his post in a manner that was highly defamatory, insinuating that the New Indian was beholden to the ruling establishment and thus unethical. 

It was argued that an examination of their timeline on ‘X’ would indicate that his editorial stance was fair to both sides of the political spectrum. It was contended that another post had been uploaded by Sanjay Sharma on ‘X,’ wherein similar insinuations of political bias were made.

Advocates Raghav Awasthi and Mukesh Sharma further asserted that Sanjay Sharma had unleashed an online mob against the New Indian, as two other defamatory posts authored by defendant no. 2, Sultan Siddiquey, and defendant no. 3, Chandra Kumar, falsely insinuating that the New Indian were beholden to one political party.

The court formed a prima facie opinion that these posts implied that the editor-in-chief of The New Indian was partial and biased towards the ruling government, potentially undermining his credibility as a journalist. It was acknowledged that allegations of favoritism towards one party over others, especially on a social media platform like ‘X’ followed by thousands, compromise the integrity of the journalist in question.

The court noted “Impartial journalism also fosters trust amongst viewers and readers. Therefore, making such statements/allegations, as can be seen from the posts, prima facie, creates doubt on the integrity of the plaintiff no.2 as a journalist for which there does not appear to be any tangible materia;”. 

In the absence of any justification for these allegations, the court found that The New Indian had established a prima facie case for an interim injunction. The balance of convenience favored The New Indian, and it was determined that they would suffer irreparable loss and injury if the injunction was not granted.

Consequently, the court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining Sanjay Sharma, Sultan Siddiquey, and Chandra Kumar from posting any defamatory material or anything that could tarnish the New Indian’s reputation on ‘X’ or any other media platform. They were also directed to remove all defamatory posts within 36 hours.

Case Title: Rajatarangini India Media Private Limited & Anr. v Sanjay Sharma & Ors.