A Delhi court has stopped journalists and activists from sharing unverified and defamatory content against Adani Enterprises. The order directs removal of such material within five days while balancing freedom of speech.
New Delhi: A Delhi court has passed an ex parte interim order stopping some journalists and activists from publishing material that could be defamatory against Gautam Adani’s company, Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).
The order came in the case Adani Enterprises Ltd v Paranjoy Guha Thakurta & Ors, where the company alleged serious damage to its reputation.
The case was heard by Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh of the Rohini Court, who also directed that already published defamatory content should be taken down from online platforms.
The court clearly stated,
“To the extent that the articles and posts are incorrect and unverified and prima facie defamatory, defendants no. 1 to 10 are also directed to expunge such defamatory material from their respective articles/social media posts/tweets and if the same is not feasible, remove the same within 5 days from date of this order.”
Adani Enterprises said in its defamation suit that certain journalists, activists and organisations have harmed the company’s goodwill and caused heavy losses worth billions of dollars. It argued that these actions damaged the company’s image, brand value and even India’s reputation globally.
The company further claimed that these individuals were
“aligned with anti-India interests and have been continuously targeting Adani Enterprises’ infrastructure and energy projects which are critical to India’s infrastructure and energy security and have disrupted these projects with ulterior motives”.
AEL also pointed out that
“It is further stated that Adani’s Australian operations aimed at securing vital resources for India were got strained and delayed and repeatedly hindered, pushing back development timelines due to the interference of such reporters, activists and organizations and which defamatory actions of theirs also led to the straining of the balance sheets of the Adani Group and delayed key investment plans.”
The company told the court that such actions were affecting its ability to raise funds and were delaying its development projects for years.
In its arguments, it also made a reference to the Hindenburg Research report which had alleged a possible 90% fall in Adani stock value and had raised doubts about the group’s debt.
The court was informed that portals like paranjoy.in, adaniwatch.org and adanifiles.com.au had been publishing repeated reports against the Adani Group, Adani Enterprises, and Gautam Adani personally.
After reviewing the case, the judge said Adani Enterprises had shown a prima facie case for granting an injunction. At the same time, the court balanced this with the right to free speech. It noted that it could not pass a blanket ban on reporting that was fair and based on verified facts.
The order stated,
“… at this stage, instead of issuing a blanket order on restraining defendants no. 1 to 9 from fair, verified and substantiated reporting and from hosting, storing/circulating such articles /posts/URLs, it would suffice the interest of justice to restrain defendants no. 1 to 10 from publishing/ distributing/ circulating unverified, unsubstantiated and ex-facie defamatory reports about the plaintiff allegedly tarnishing the reputation of the plaintiff till the next date of hearing.”
The company was represented by Senior Advocate Jagdeep Sharma, along with advocates Vijay Aggarwal, Guneet Sidhu, Verdaan Jain, Muskan Aggarwal and Deepak Aggarwal.
Case Title:
Adani Enterprises Ltd v Paranjoy Guha Thakurta & Ors
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi riots case
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
