Newslaundry has challenged the Centre’s takedown order on its Adani coverage, calling it unconstitutional and an “arbitrary overreach.” The Delhi High Court will hear the case on September 22.
New Delhi: Digital news platform Newslaundry has moved the Delhi High Court, challenging the Central government’s order asking it to remove certain videos and reports related to businessman Gautam Adani’s Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).
The matter was listed before Justice Sachin Datta on Friday, but the hearing could not take place as the judge rose early due to prior commitments. The case will now likely be heard on September 22.
The controversy started after the Central government, in a communication issued on September 16, directed Newslaundry to “take appropriate action” and remove the content in line with a September 6 trial court order that had asked for the removal of allegedly defamatory material against Adani.
Newslaundry, however, argued that its reporting contains nothing defamatory about Adani and that the Centre has gone far beyond what the trial court had directed.
The plea stated:
“The Respondent [Central government] has gone over and above the directions of the Ld Trial Court, by requiring the Petitioner and other recipients of the Impugned Order to remove all and every video/publication/ reporting undertaken wrt to the plaintiff [Adani Enterprises Limited], without going into the aspect that the said video/publication/ reporting could be a simple reporting on facts/ current affairs in exercise of their journalistic duties.”
According to the petition, the government’s order was not aimed at following judicial directions but at protecting private interests.
Newslaundry’s plea further noted:
“It is evident that the Respondent on its own accord and/or with the intent of protection of private interests, and in grave violation of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, directed necessary action by the Petitioner which is nothing short of an arbitrary overreach of the powers vested with the Respondent under the present statutory/ constitutional regime as discussed in the present Petition.”
The platform went on to argue that this move by the government amounts to silencing critical reporting on Adani by imposing a blanket restriction.
The plea stressed:
“The Impugned Order [of Central government] is nothing short of complete administrative overreach and inherently arbitrary exercise of executive power by the Respondent in directing action on the basis of an order passed in a civil dispute between private parties. The Impugned Order has no legal, statutory and/or constitutional basis in the first place. The government cannot seek compliance of court orders in complete violation of the principles of separation of powers.”
ALSO READ: Bhima Koregaon Case: Supreme Court Rejects Varavara Rao’s Plea to Shift to Hyderabad
The petition was filed on behalf of Newslaundry through advocates Uddhav Khanna and Dhruva Vig.
This case has now raised significant questions about press freedom, executive overreach, and the constitutional guarantee of free speech under Article 19, as the Delhi High Court will have to decide whether the government exceeded its powers by intervening in what appears to be a civil dispute between a media house and a private corporate entity.
Read Live Coverage:
Click Here To Read More Reports on Adani Enterprises
