Newslaundry’s Managing Editor Manisha Pande and other journalists have refused to withdraw their ₹2 crore defamation suit against Abhijit Iyer-Mitra in the Delhi High Court. The matter is now listed before the Joint Registrar, with the next hearing on May 19.
In a significant development before the Delhi High Court, Newslaundry’s Managing Editor Manisha Pande has made it clear that she will not withdraw her Rs 2 crore defamation suit against political commentator Abhijit Iyer-Mitra.
The matter was taken up by Justice Vikas Mahajan, who recorded the submissions made by Advocate Bani Dikshit on instructions from Pande. The Court noted that Pande is firm in her decision to continue with the case and does not want to withdraw the civil suit filed against Iyer-Mitra.
“The counsel has returned with instructions to the effect that the plaintiff does not wish to withdraw the present suit. List the matter before the Joint Registrar for further proceedings,”
the Court stated.
Following this, the Court directed that the matter be placed before the Joint Registrar for further steps in the case. The next date of hearing has been fixed for May 19.
The defamation suit was filed by Pande along with other journalists from the digital news platform Newslaundry. The case was filed after Abhijit Iyer-Mitra allegedly posted a tweet calling the media organisation a “basti/brothel” and referring to its journalists as “prostitutes”.
According to the plaintiffs, these statements were not only offensive but part of a larger attempt to defame and harass them publicly.
Before the High Court, the journalists argued that the remarks were part of a sustained campaign of vilification that caused them serious mental trauma, harassment and embarrassment.
They have sought a permanent injunction to restrain Iyer-Mitra from making any such statements in the future, a written apology from him, and damages of ₹2 crore for harm caused to their reputation.
Earlier, on May 21 last year, the High Court had recorded an undertaking given by Iyer-Mitra to delete certain social media posts within five hours. Subsequently, on May 26, the Court issued summons in the case. At that time, the Court also gave liberty to the plaintiffs to approach it again if any new defamatory content was posted.
During those earlier hearings, Senior Advocate Percival Billimoria, appearing for Iyer-Mitra, informed the Court that the concerned posts had already been deleted. However, the counsel representing the journalists strongly disagreed with the stand taken by the defendant and submitted,
“There is absolutely no remorse. He is commenting on the post and writing poetically.”
Billimoria had also requested the Court to dismiss the defamation suit and even sought costs against the plaintiffs. In addition, he asked for an investigation into Newslaundry. The High Court, however, refused to pass any such direction and clarified the limited scope of the proceedings by stating,
“We are only confined to the posts. If you have any other grievance please take it up elsewhere.”
The Bench then proceeded to issue summons and continued the interim protection earlier granted in favour of the plaintiffs. The Court also made it clear that if any fresh defamatory material was published, the plaintiffs would be free to initiate appropriate legal action again.
Importantly, the Court observed during the hearings that the language allegedly used by Iyer-Mitra was not acceptable in a civilised society. The Bench even indicated that it was inclined to order police action in the matter. It was only after this strong observation that Iyer-Mitra agreed to withdraw his earlier tweets.
Despite this, the plaintiffs have now alleged that Iyer-Mitra resumed making defamatory statements. They have pointed to tweets dated July 3, 2025 and August 4, 2025, claiming that these posts revived references to the earlier content which was already under challenge before the Court.
According to the journalists, these fresh remarks once again damaged their reputation and goodwill. They argue that such posts also encouraged other social media users to make derogatory and abusive comments against them online.
With Manisha Pande refusing to withdraw the suit, the defamation battle is set to continue before the Delhi High Court. The case will now proceed before the Joint Registrar, and all eyes will be on the upcoming hearing scheduled for May 19, as the dispute between the media platform and the political commentator moves into its next phase.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Newslaundry Journalists
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
