Manmohan Singh, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed the abovementioned suit for permanent injunction and damages against six defendants, namely, (i) The Indian Express Ltd. through Editor-in-Chief and Publisher, (ii) Mr. Maneesh Chibber, Reporter, The Indian Express Ltd., (iii) Bennett, Coleman and Company Ltd., The Managing Director & The Editor-in-Chief of ‘Times Now’, (iv) Global Broadcast News (GBN) through Managing Director, Editor-in-Chief of ‘CNN-IBN’ and Turner International through Managing Director, (v) Ms. Intern through defendant No.2, and (vi) Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

2. The plaintiff has prayed for the relief of permanent injunction against the defendant Nos.1 to 5, its associates, sister concerns, its agents, representatives, correspondents, officers, employees and/or any other person, entity, in print or electronic media or via internet or otherwise from publishing, republishing, carrying out any further reports or articles or any other matter telecasts or repeat telecasts or programs, or debates or any discussion or reporting of any kind, directly or indirectly, pertaining to the purported complaint dated 30th November, 2013 and also prayed for a decree of damages against the said defendant Nos.1 to 5, jointly and severally, at least for an amount of `5 crores or for any higher amount and sought leave of this Court in this regard.

3. Admittedly, the plaintiff has been an eminent lawyer for 23 years before being elevated to the position of a Judge of this Court. The plaintiff then served as a Judge in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh and thereafter returned as a Judge of this Court, before being elevated to the position of Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. The plaintiff was elevated to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 18th December, 2009 and resigned on 19th December, 2012 to take over as the Chairperson of the National Green Tribunal, a position that he presently holds. The plaintiff has served as a Judge for over 23 years in his career.

4. The plaintiff is stated to have approached this Court as a consequence to the breach of his fundamental and personal rights, due to the alleged defamatory and malicious acts of defendant Nos.1 to 5.

5. Defendant No.5, details relating to whose identity are not disclosed and who is now stated to have become a lawyer, is stated to have sent an affidavit dated 30th November, 2013 to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India making certain allegations against the plaintiff. Defendant No.5 claims to have interned under the plaintiff in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, however, the plaintiff on the basis of the information received regarding the name of the defendant No.5 from defendant No.2, mentioned that defendant No.5 was neither an intern nominated by the Supreme Court nor by the plaintiff himself. With a view to safeguarding her dignity and maintaining her privacy, the identity of the said defendant Nos.5 at this stage, is being kept confidential and this defendant is not being named and is being referred to as the “intern”. However, for the sake of disclosure to this Court, the plaintiff has filed the name of the defendant No.5 in a sealed envelope.

6. Defendant No.1 is a prominent national daily having high circulation both in India and abroad. The defendant No.2 is the author of the alleged defamatory news items published by the defendant No.1 on 10th January 2014, 11th January 2014 and 13th January 2014. The defendant Nos.3 and 4 are broadcasters who telecast news and current affairs on their TV channels; defendant No.3 is the owner of the TV channel “Times Now” while the defendant No.4 is a partnership entity between Global Broadcast News and Turner International which owns and operates the TV channel “CNN-IBN”.

7. The defendant No.6 is the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, which has regulatory control over the print, electroni