Govt orders takedown of videos, posts on Adani citing Delhi court order

The Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on Tuesday (September 16) sent notices to two media houses and a number of YouTube channels ordering them to take down 138 videos and 83 Instagram posts that mentioned the Adani Group.

The media outlets, and content creators include Newslaundry, The Wire, HW News, and Aakash Banerjee’s The Deshbhakt and content creators like Ravish Kumar, Ajit Anjum and Dhruv Rathee.

The directive refers to an ex parte gag order passed by the North West Delhi district court on September 6 in a defamation case filed by Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL). An ex parte order is issued when some parties to a case – in this case the journalists and activists involved – are not heard.

Media outlets get notices

In the government notice, 138 YouTube links and 83 Instagram posts have been flagged. Newslaundry alone has been directed to remove 42 videos from its channel. The ministry said that despite the September 6 court order, these links were not taken down.

“Accordingly, you are directed to take appropriate action for compliance of the aforementioned Order, and submit the action taken to the ministry within 36 hours of the issue of this communication,” the ministry’s letter stated.

Also read: 'India stifles free expression, media freedom': Report on Commonwealth nations

According to a Wire report, several of the videos flagged did not necessarily contain any new reportage or opinion. For example, a Newslaundry subscription appeal featuring a screenshot of an Adani story is being flagged, said the report.

The Wire has reportedly received a notice over a single Instagram post referencing allegations made by the US Securities and Exchange Commission against the Adani Group, matters that are already on public record.

Copies of the notice were also marked to Meta Platforms Inc. and Google Inc., placing responsibility on intermediaries to act under the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Delhi court's gag order

The ministry’s move stems from the ex parte interim injunction issued by the senior civil judge Anuj Kumar Singh of Rohini Court on September 6. The Delhi court had instructed the journalists to delete articles and social media posts that allegedly defamed the Adani Group.

The judge had directed the removal of allegedly defamatory content against AEL and restrained journalists from publishing unverified claims against the company. The court had ordered to “expunge defamatory material from their respective articles/social media posts/tweets and if the same is not feasible, remove the same within 5 days”.

Also read: India ranks 151st on World Press Freedom Index: Reporters Without Borders

However, the court also clarified that fair reporting remains protected. “This order shall not be construed to restrain any person from reporting about investigation and court proceedings in relation to the allegations so long as it is fair and accurate reporting based on substantiated and verified material,” the court had said.

Journalists file appeal

Journalists Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das and Ayush Joshi have challenged the recent Delhi court's gag order restraining them from publishing any defamatory content against businessman Gautam Adani’s Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).

Incidentally, those who received notices from the information and broadcasting ministry on Tuesday, are not party to that case.

Thakurta filed individually, while Nair, Dasgupta, Das, and Joshi have jointly filed an appeal.

They argued that their reports did not mention Adani Enterprises Limited but referred only to Gautam Adani or the Adani Group. Thakurta also contended that the court had passed an over-broad and all-encompassing restraining order without specifying which content was found to be defamatory.

Adani Group's defamation suit

In its defamation suit, AEL claimed that certain journalists, activists, and organisations damaged its reputation, eroded investor confidence, thereby causing massive loss to its image, brand equity and undermining India’s brand image.

It alleged that their reporting was aligned with “anti-India interests” aimed at disrupting infrastructure and energy projects vital to national security. The company pointed to articles published on platforms such as paranjoy.in, adaniwatch.org, and adanifiles.com.au as examples of persistent negative coverage.

The civil court, after hearing the case, concluded that AEL had established a prima facie case for an interim injunction. It agreed that unverified reports could “wipe off billions worth of investor’s money, create panic in the market, and cause loss of goodwill and reputation of plaintiffs at a global scale.”