Delhi News Live Updates: Court quashes Adani gag order against journalists, calls it ‘not sustainable’

Businessman Samir Modi, brother of fugitive Lalit Modi, was arrested by the Delhi Police on Thursday in connection with a rape case.

Officials said Modi, 55, was taken into custody at Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport while attempting to board a flight. The case relates to a complaint filed earlier by his former live-in partner, according to police sources.

The case was registered at New Friends Colony police station in South-East Delhi. Police sources also claimed the woman had allegedly demanded Rs 50 crore to settle the matter.

No official statement has been issued by Delhi Police so far. Modi was produced before a court and remanded to one day of judicial custody. He is scheduled to be produced again on Friday. Read

Hearing a challenge by journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta to an order restraining him from publishing alleged defamatory content on Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL), a Delhi court on Thursday observed that the company did not appear to be sure whether they had indeed been defamed by the journalist.

“What is the relief being asked by you? You’re not yourself sure if it’s defamatory…you’re seeking a declaration from the court. How can [an] injunction be granted if it hasn’t been declared defamatory,” District Judge Sunil Chaudhary of the Rohini court said on Thursday (September 18).

Guha Thakurta has challenged an ex parte (without hearing the other party) interim order passed on September 6 by Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh, while hearing a defamation case filed by AEL alleging that “coordinated defamatory” content had been put on various websites to tarnish the reputation of the company and disrupt its global business operations. Read

A Delhi court has overturned an earlier gag order that restrained journalists from publishing alleged defamatory content on Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL), ruling it “not sustainable” as the defendants were not given a hearing. The order came in an appeal filed by journalists Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi, with District Judge Ashish Aggarwal observing that such an order would unfairly allow plaintiffs to push intermediaries to remove content without due process. The Editors Guild of India had earlier raised concerns over the September 6 directive, under which journalists and content creators received takedown notices from YouTube and government authorities. Meanwhile, journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta’s separate challenge to the same order remains pending.

Get your umbrellas out, it's raining in Delhi!

IMD has forecast moderate rain with thunderstorm and lightning for the day, especially in parts of South Delhi. Temperature in the city is forecast to be around 33-35°C (max) and 25°C (min).

In other news, the Union government on Thursday informed the Delhi High Court that the Type VI bungalow at 35, Lodi Estate, which Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) convenor Arvind Kejriwal had suggested be allocated to him, has been allotted to Union Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary in July this year.

Justice Sachin Datta orally reiterated that residential allotment cannot be based “purely on whims” and a “transparent mechanism” has to be in place, and directed that the joint secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) and the director of the Directorate of Estates remain present virtually on the next date of hearing, scheduled for September 25. Read our report.

Meanwhile, polling is underway at Delhi University colleges.

Our reporter on the ground says that NSUI has alleged that ABVP is manipulating EVMs in the Delhi University elections by marking blue ink in front of its candidates’ names to sway voters. The student wing said DU administration is “colluding” with ABVP and demanded urgent intervention by election authorities. NSUI’s presidential candidate Joslyn Nandita Choudhary called it "an attack on free and fair student democracy."

The incident took place at Hansraj college where Choudhary went for an EVM check and alleged that she found blue ink marks found right next to the ABVP candidates name on the EVM. College authorities said they're looking into the matter.

The order has been reserved.

The September 6 court order said: “… 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 (Adani Enterprises Limited) allegedly tarnishing the reputation of the plaintiff till the next date of hearing.”

“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,” Judge Anuj Kumar Singh of Rohini court had said while passing an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of AEL.

For context, journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta had challenged an order passed by a Delhi court on September 6, which restrained him and others from publishing alleged defamatory content on Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) and directed them to remove unverified posts.

The court had clarified that verified reporting was permissible and there was no blanket ban on reporting on Adani Enterprises.

Senior advocate Trideep Pais, who appeared for Thakurta, told the court on Wednesday: “It’s literally like the plaintiff (AEL) wants to control the whole media. This order is completely overboard.”

Senior advocate Anurag Ahluwalia, who represented AEL in court, responded: “This is defamatory. We take strong objection to this.”

Showing the Bloomberg judgement, Trideep Pais, says the learned judge should have mentioned what part of the articles were defamatory. "Has he verified everything, why is he only indicating," asks the judge.

Pais says, "He has the material. My grievance is that the court didn't point to what was prima facie defamatory."

The judge asks if he's making a claim, why isn't he making it public?, to which Pais says he wasn't sent a legal notice.

"The article is very general. You claimed that the government is changing its order at the behest of Adani - but which order? Till a legal notice is sent to you, you'll publish whatever you want?, asks the judge.

Trideep Pais, appearing for journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta requests five minutes for a rejoinder to AEL's arguments.

Senior advocate Ahluwalia says, "Our agony is the buck doesn't stop here. Time and time again articles are written to tarnish the reputation. Had they been a fair journalist, they would have cited evidence and said we've spoken to the following people. Should I wait for shares to fall? I have proof to show that Guha gets chinese funding."

Senior Advocate Ahluwalia appearing for AEL mentions that it was written "What Elon is to US, Adani is to Modi." He also mentions that the article says that Modi has travelled to various countries to promote Adani and has hurt India's interests.

"I can't even fathom the idea of this audacity," he adds.

The judge asks, "What is defamatory here" to which Ahluwalia says, "that the rules are being bent to favour us." So what is defamatory in this, did you shares fall after this? the judge asks. "That it got a clean chit is a different matter altogether."

The judge says, "If you were defamed, then you should have specified the quantum of the damages."

Senior Advocate Anurag Ahluwalia appearing for AEL says, "I just want to show four paras from the order. We got a clean chit from the SC in the Hindenburg case."

The judge asked AEL to list out the observations in the case pertaining to Thakurta. Ahluwalia mentions an article titled "Adani's controversial footprint in India's neighbourhood".

The judge asks AEL, "Who told you about this in Pitampura (questions on jurisdiction)." Vijay Aggarwal, appearing for Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) says that since it's on the internet, the jurisdiction is all of India.

The judge asks, "What is the relief being asked by you? You're not yourself sure if it's defamatory...you're seeking a declaration from the court. How can injunction be granted if it hasn't been declared defamatory. This is not a title, it's a defamation case."

Test of defamation can't be whether they've been found guilty or not, says Trideep Pais.

"There is no reasoning as to how a prima facie case was made out. It (the order) doesn't say in what manner irreparable injury can be caused to the plaintiff (AEL). As per the order, the plaintiff has been turned into a judge. He will decide what is unverified. Plaintiff can write to Google saying please remove this, as per the order. Based on this order, the plaintiff can have everything removed from the net. Any intermediary can be informed of any link by AEL and then they'll have to take it down," he added.

Trideep Pais, appearing for journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta says, "The urgency is that intermediaries have been asked to remove multiple articles. Who will determine what will be defamatory has been left to the plaintiff (AEL). That's my argument. "

Reading from the impugned order, he says, "It has nowhere been stated how the material is defamatory. There was no urgency to file this suit. Some content is as old as 2017."

Calling this development ‘troubling’, the Editors Guild of India voiced “deep concern” over the order of a Delhi court that restrained nine journalists, activists and entities from publishing or circulating “unverified, unsubstantiated and ex facie defamatory” reports about AEL, and directed the removal of such content within five days.

“More disturbingly, the order further empowers the corporate entity to keep forwarding URLs and links of any content it considers defamatory to intermediaries or government agencies, who are then obliged to remove such content within 36 hours,” the Guild said in a statement.

Calling this development 'troubling', the Editors Guild of India voiced "deep concern" over the order of a Delhi court that restrained nine journalists, activists and entities from publishing or circulating "unverified, unsubstantiated and ex facie defamatory" reports about AEL, and directed the removal of such content within five days.

"More disturbingly, the order further empowers the corporate entity to keep forwarding URLs and links of any content it considers defamatory to intermediaries or government agencies, who are then obliged to remove such content within 36 hours," the Guild said in a statement.

Journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta's challenge to an order passed by a Delhi court on September 6, which restrained him and others from publishing alleged defamatory content on Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) and directed them to remove unverified posts is being heard.