The Delhi High Court has ordered Wikipedia to remove a page titled “Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation” related to an ongoing defamation case filed by ANI, calling it “prima facie contemptuous.” The court emphasized that comments on the page could interfere with legal proceedings, directing its removal within 36 hours and warning Wikipedia of non-compliance consequences.
New Delhi: Today, on October 16th, the Delhi High Court directed Wikipedia to take down a page related to the ongoing defamation case filed by Asian News International (ANI) against the online encyclopaedia, calling the page “prima facie contemptuous.”
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that the page, titled “Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation,” contained comments about the court that could be seen as contemptuous. The court therefore ordered the immediate removal of the page.
The Wikipedia page had claimed that
“the judge in the case has threatened to order the government of India to shut down Wikipedia in the country.”
In response, the court firmly stated, “First take down the Wiki page on this matter, then we will hear.”
Read Also: Delhi Police Achieve Landmark | First Conviction Under BNS
The directive came during a hearing of the Wikimedia Foundation’s plea challenging a previous order from a single-judge bench. The earlier order required a Wikipedia representative to appear in court for the defamation case and disclose the identities of editors who contributed defamatory content about ANI to the Wikipedia page.
On Monday, the two-judge bench had already objected to the creation of the Wikipedia page during the ongoing case, emphasizing that
“the page will have to be taken down for the case to proceed, and the single judge cannot be put in fear or be threatened.”
During Wednesday’s hearing, ANI Advocate Siddhant Kumar informed the court that after the previous hearing, the division bench’s observations had been discussed on the Wikipedia page. In response, the court remarked that this development “compounds the contempt.”
The bench further noted,
“The said description of the impugned order and of the single judge is prima facie contemptuous and amounts to interference in the court proceedings, and that too by an entity whose editors are defendants in the suit.”
Wikipedia’s counsel, Akhil Sibal, argued that the discussions on the page were not directly created by Wikipedia itself, but assured the court that “if the court orders its deletion, it will be complied with.” In response, the court ordered,
“Accordingly, in the interim, this Court directs that the pages on Wikipedia pertaining to the single judge as well as discussion of the observations of the division bench be taken down or deleted within 36 hours.”
This ruling comes in the context of ANI’s defamation suit against Wikipedia, in which the news agency objected to adverse comments made on its Wikipedia page. Specifically, ANI took issue with the claim that it
“has been criticized for having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events.”
ANI has sought Rs. 2 crore in damages from Wikipedia, alleging that the platform published “false and defamatory content with malicious intent to tarnish the news agency’s reputation and discredit its goodwill.”
On August 20, the court had ordered Wikipedia to disclose the identities of three editors responsible for making the defamatory edits within two weeks. When Wikipedia failed to comply, ANI filed a contempt petition, prompting the Delhi High Court to issue a notice to the online platform. The court reprimanded Wikipedia for its non-compliance, warning that the platform’s “business transactions could be closed in India.”
The court took a strong stance, remarking that “Wikipedia should not operate in India if they do not respect the country’s laws.” The foundation has since been under pressure to take swift action in response to the court’s orders.
This case highlights growing concerns over the regulation of online platforms and their accountability in cases involving defamation and misinformation. The court’s insistence on strict compliance by Wikipedia underscores the legal challenges faced by global tech platforms operating in India.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
