Digital news outlet Newslaundry moved the Delhi High Court on Friday challenging a Central government directive to remove videos and reports concerning Gautam Adani’s Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).
The matter was listed before Justice Sachin Datta, but the hearing could not take place as the judge rose early due to prior commitments. The case is now expected to be taken up on September 22.
The Centre, in a September 16 communication, had instructed the platform to comply with a September 6 trial court order and take down allegedly defamatory content related to Adani.
Newslaundry, however, has contended that its coverage contains nothing defamatory and argued that the government has exceeded the scope of the trial court’s directions.
"The Respondent [Central government] has gone over and above the directions of the Ld Trial Court, by requiring the Petitioner and other recipients of the Impugned Order to remove all and every video/publication/ reporting undertaken wrt to the plaintiff [Adani Enterprises Limited], without going into the aspect that the said video/publication/ reporting could be a simple reporting on facts/ current affairs in exercise of their journalistic duties," Newslaundry's plea said.
The petition stated that the takedown order by the government was passed to protect the interests of a private party.
"It is evident that the Respondent on its own accord and/or with the intent of protection of private interests, and in grave violation of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, directed necessary action by the Petitioner which is nothing short of an arbitrary overreach of the powers vested with the Respondent under the present statutory/ constitutional regime as discussed in the present Petition," the news platform argued, according to Bar and Bench.
It further stated that a blanket ban has been ordered by the government on any reporting against Adani.
As per the plea,
"The Impugned Order [of Central government] is nothing short of complete administrative overreach and inherently arbitrary exercise of executive power by the Respondent in directing action on the basis of an order passed in a civil dispute between private parties. The Impugned Order has no legal, statutory and/or constitutional basis in the first place. The government cannot seek compliance of court orders in complete violation of the principles of separation of powers."
The plea for Newslaundry was filed through advocate Uddhav Khanna and Dhruva Vig.