Journalist Ravish Kumar has challenged a Central government order asking him to take down videos on Gautam Adani, calling it a “SLAPP” to silence journalism. The Delhi High Court will hear the case on September 22.
New Delhi: Journalist Ravish Kumar has moved the Delhi High Court against a recent order of the Central government which directed him to remove videos on industrialist Gautam Adani and his companies from his YouTube channel.
The government had passed this order after a defamation case was filed by Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) in Delhi’s Rohini Court.
Ravish Kumar, who has close to 14 million subscribers on his YouTube channel, has called the move an attack on press freedom. He has argued that Adani’s defamation lawsuit against journalists and the government’s action is nothing but a
“classic Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), designed to silence legitimate journalism through legal intimidation and resource depletion.”
The matter will now come up for hearing before Justice Sachin Datta of the Delhi High Court on September 22, Monday.
The controversy began when, on September 6, the Rohini trial court issued an order on Adani Enterprises’ defamation suit. The order not only restrained the named journalists but also John Doe defendants (unnamed parties) from publishing what it termed as defamatory content against Adani.
Acting on this, on September 16, the Central government issued a communication to Kumar and other YouTubers and digital platforms, directing them to “take appropriate action” in line with the trial court’s order, effectively asking them to remove videos and reports about Adani.
However, on September 18, an appellate court partially modified the trial court order by granting relief to four journalists.
But the restriction against John Doe defendants, which includes unnamed YouTubers and online platforms, continues to remain in force.
In his petition, filed through advocate Shantanu Derhgawen, Ravish Kumar has sharply criticized the Central government’s action. He has said that the order represents
“an unprecedented and unconstitutional exercise of executive power that strikes at the very foundation of democratic governance, press freedom and the separation of powers doctrine enshrined in the Constitution of India.”
He further added,
“By directing compliance with a private civil court order without statutory authority, procedural compliance, or constitutional justification, the Respondent [Central government] has violated fundamental principles that have been the bedrock of Indian constitutional jurisprudence since independence.”
The journalist has also contended that this order by the government amounts to prior restraint on free speech and undermines democratic discourse. According to him, it is
“an administrative overreach by the government.”
Meanwhile, digital news platform Newslaundry has also filed a similar petition challenging the same order. Their plea is also scheduled to be heard by Justice Sachin Datta on September 22.
This case will be closely watched as it directly raises questions about freedom of speech, the independence of journalism, and whether the government can step in to enforce civil court orders in private defamation disputes.
Click Here To Read More Reports on Adani
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
