The Delhi High Court dismissed a contempt plea against Himal Southasian for not deleting a report on Anant Ambani’s Vantara park. The Court found no legal order was violated by the magazine.
New Delhi: Today, On May 27, The Delhi High Court has dismissed a contempt of court petition that was filed against the news website Himal Southasian and its editor, Roman Gautam.
The petition was filed because the news portal refused to delete an article that questioned how elephants were moved to the Vantara wildlife conservation park, a project associated with Anant Ambani.
Justice Anish Dayal, who heard the case, made it clear that there was no disobedience of any court order by Himal Southasian that could lead to contempt proceedings.
The Court noted that although the article was earlier criticised by the Court, there was never an actual order asking Himal Southasian to remove the article.
The Court said:
“After having perused the petition and hearing the submission of the parties, the Court is of the opinion that these circumstances do not provide a cause of action for the petitioner to file a contempt petition, since there is no direction of which wilful disobedience can be alleged.”
Based on this observation, the Court dismissed the contempt petition on May 19.
The controversy started with a report titled “The costs of Reliance’s wildlife ambitions” published by Himal Southasian in March 2024. In the article, the portal raised concerns about how some animals were taken to the Vantara park.
It claimed that not only rescued animals but also healthy and even endangered species were taken there. The article named two organisations – the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust and the Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre – and mentioned that even government agencies were involved.
This matter was related to an earlier legal plea filed in 2023 by advocate Rahul Narula. He was concerned that the wedding celebrations of Anant Ambani and Radhika Merchant at Reliance Greens might harm animals in the area.
However, the Delhi High Court dismissed this petition in February 2024, calling it based on mere fears and not solid evidence. Still, the Court allowed a High-Powered Committee (HPC) to be present at the venue during the wedding.
The Court stated that the purpose of the HPC would be to monitor the event and make sure that no cruelty or harm came to the animals.
Later, Rahul Narula filed a contempt petition, this time claiming that animals were mistreated during the wedding events.
This second petition was also dismissed in August 2024. In that judgment, the Delhi High Court also commented on the Himal Southasian article.
ALSO READ: Chaos at DU Law Faculty: 150 Students Denied Exam Admit Cards, Protest Turns Intense
The Court said the article had “all the trappings of sensationalism” and also criticised the way it made comments about the High-Powered Committee, calling them “in bad taste.”
Following this, the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust and the Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre argued that since the High Court had criticised the Himal Southasian report, there was an “implied” expectation that the portal should take down the article.
As the article was still online, they decided to file a contempt of court case against the portal and its editor.
But the Delhi High Court on May 19 clarified that there had never been any direct court order telling Himal Southasian to delete the article.
Therefore, there could not be any charge of contempt.
The Court stated:
“A perusal of the said order does not indicate any directions issued against respondent nos.1 and 2 (Himal Southasian and its editor), wilful disobedience of which can be agitated in a contempt petition. Accordingly, this contempt petition stands dismissed along with the pending application.”
Advocate Adhish Srivastava represented the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust and the Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre in this matter.
On the other hand, Himal Southasian and Roman Gautam were represented by Advocates Vrinda Grover, Devika Tulsiani, and Soutik Banerjee.
The Union of India was represented by Vineet Dhanda, who is the Central Government Standing Counsel, along with Panel Counsel Chetan Jadon and Advocates Vansh Jadon, Hemlata Singh, and Shivangi Rajawat.
This case serves as an important example of how courts look into the actual existence of a legal order before entertaining any contempt petition.
The Court made it clear that just because an article has been criticised, it does not automatically mean that it must be deleted – unless a clear legal direction has been given.
Case Title:
Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre Society & Anr v. Himal Southasian & Ors.
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on AMBANI
