A Delhi court granted interim relief to Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) on Saturday, restraining journalists, activists, and foreign-linked organisations from publishing or circulating allegedly unverified and defamatory content targeting the company. Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh, hearing AEL’s defamation suit, also ordered the removal of contentious material already published on various platforms, including websites and social media, within a specified timeframe.
The suit alleged that coordinated publications on Paranjoy. In adaniwatch.org, adanifiles.com.au, as well as related videos and posts, were intentionally aimed at damaging AEL’s reputation and disrupting its global business operations. The defendants named include Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskanta Das, Ayush Joshi, the Bob Brown Foundation, Dreamscape Network International, Getup Limited, Domain Directors Private Limited (trading as Instra), and certain unnamed individuals.
AEL’s counsel Vijay Aggarwal argued that the unchecked spread of baseless allegations had not only harmed the company’s reputation but also caused substantial financial losses to investors. He emphasized that the company had faced regulatory and media scrutiny in 2023 but emerged cleared of any wrongdoing, restoring market confidence.
The court observed that the alleged defamatory articles could adversely impact AEL’s balance sheet, delay projects, erode investor wealth, damage goodwill globally, and hinder the company’s future business prospects and fundraising abilities. It found a prima facie case in favor of the plaintiff and noted that restraining further circulation was necessary to prevent additional harm.
The interim order bars the defendants from publishing, distributing, or circulating “unverified, unsubstantiated and ex facie defamatory reports” about AEL until the next hearing. It also directs the removal of existing defamatory content within five days and mandates intermediaries to take down such material within 36 hours of notification, under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules.
Importantly, the court clarified that the order does not prevent fair, verified, and substantiated reporting on the company or on investigations and court proceedings, ensuring that legitimate journalism is not restrained. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on October 9.
