Convicted of defamation by a Gujarat magistrate in a case filed by Adani Enterprises, with his sentence suspended and appeal pending, journalist Ravi Nair was arrested this month on a non-bailable warrant after a court rejected his exemption from personal appearance. With the Gujarat High Court declining interim release, he has moved the Supreme Court, arguing that the warrant ignored the graded procedure the law requires and that his continued custody in a bailable offence is unwarranted.
New Delhi: Journalist Ravi Nair has approached the Supreme Court seeking release from custody in a criminal defamation case filed by Adani Enterprises Ltd (AEL), after he was taken into custody in furtherance of a Gujarat court’s non-bailable warrant (NBW) [Ravi Nair v. State of Gujarat and Another].
Nair has filed a Special Leave Petition challenging a Gujarat High Court order that declined him interim relief. Advocate Abhik Chimni mentioned the matter before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant at 2 pm on Thursday, seeking urgent listing; the CJI did not entertain the mentioning.
The background
Adani Enterprises had filed the criminal defamation case alleging that Nair published and disseminated a series of posts on social media containing false and defamatory statements intended to damage the reputation of AEL and the Adani Group. In February this year, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mansa, convicted Nair of defamation and sentenced him to one year’s simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000. On March 9, the Gandhinagar Sessions Court suspended the sentence and released him on bail pending the disposal of his appeal.
On September 3, the Sessions Court rejected his application for exemption from personal appearance, issued a non-bailable warrant and declared him an absconder. Pursuant to the warrant, Nair was taken into custody on September 17 and lodged at the Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad. He then approached the Gujarat High Court challenging the rejection of his plea to cancel the NBW and the absconder declaration; the High Court, while reserving its order, declined to grant him interim release, following which he moved the Supreme Court.
The grounds of challenge
In his petition, Nair contends that the non-bailable warrant and his custody violate the graded procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal, under which a court is expected to resort to summons and bailable warrants before issuing a non-bailable warrant, the most coercive of the three. He argues that defamation is not a heinous offence but a bailable one carrying a maximum punishment of two years, and that his continued incarceration would cause irreversible harm.
Nair further relies on the Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Meenakshi v. State of Haryana, contending that the personal appearance of an accused on every date of an appeal is not mandatory where the advocate is present and the proceedings are not delayed on account of the accused’s absence. He states that his advocate appeared on all dates of hearing, that he himself appeared before the trial court on as many as three dates, and that he was not served with any summons or bailable warrant before the NBW was issued. He also points out that, with the High Court having reserved its order for September 30, he would remain in custody for about a week absent interim relief.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court Quashes Gag Order Against Journalists In The Adani Defamation Case
Why it matters
The plea raises a question about the use of the most coercive process of arrest, a non-bailable warrant, in a bailable, non-heinous offence. The Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami cautioned that personal liberty is a precious right and that non-bailable warrants should not be issued as a matter of course, but only after the graduated steps of summons and bailable warrants have been tried, or where they would plainly be futile. Where an accused’s counsel has been appearing and no lesser process has been attempted, the issuance of an NBW, and a consequent arrest, is open to challenge on precisely those lines.
The case also sits within a wider debate about the use of criminal defamation against journalists, and the concern that the process of prosecution, summons, appearances, and the threat of custody, can itself operate as a burden on reportage, independent of the eventual outcome. Nair’s conviction is under appeal and has not attained finality; the present proceedings concern not the correctness of that conviction but the legality of his arrest on a non-bailable warrant while the appeal, with his sentence suspended, is pending.
Nothing has been decided by the Supreme Court, which has not, as yet, taken up the petition, the mentioning for urgent listing having not been entertained. The Gujarat High Court’s order on his challenge to the NBW is reserved and awaited. This report expresses no view on the merits of the defamation case or of the pending appeal; it concerns only the procedural challenge to the warrant and the custody, which remains to be adjudicated.
Case Title: Ravi Nair v. State of Gujarat and Another [Diary No. 59598/2026]
Forum: Supreme Court of India (mentioning before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant)
Appearance: Advocate Abhik Chimni for the petitioner.
Status: SLP filed seeking release from custody, challenging the Gujarat HC’s refusal of interim relief against a non-bailable warrant. Urgent-listing mention not entertained. Conviction under appeal, sentence suspended; Gujarat HC order on the NBW challenge reserved for September 30. Merits not decided.