Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
YASHWANT VARMA
Sushil Ansal – Appellant
Versus
Endemol India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER
1. The present suit has been instituted for a decree of mandatory and permanent injunction restraining defendant No. 3 from exhibiting, broadcasting, telecasting and releasing on its digital/OTT platforms, the series titled `Trial by Fire`. The web series is to be aired on 13 January 2023. The plaintiff further seeks a decree of mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendants from publishing the book `Trial by Fire: The Tragic Tale of Uphaar Fire Tragedy' [The Book], including and extending to publication of audio/video adaptations of the Book and from exhibiting, broadcasting, telecasting defamatory, libellous, slanderous and false statements made by way of the Book on digital/OTT platforms. A further relief of delivery-up is also sought against the defendants.
2. The Court has heard Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the plaintiff, Mr. Sethi who appeared for defendant Nos. 1 and 2, the producer and co-producer of the web series in question, Mr. Nayar and Mr. Sibal, learne
The balance between the right to privacy and freedom of expression must be upheld, emphasizing that claims of defamation require full trial for verification.
The court ruled that the right to freedom of speech takes precedence over defamation claims unless a strong prima facie case is established, underscoring the necessity to balance fundamental rights.
Interim injunctions in defamation suits must balance free speech and reputation, requiring clear evidence of harm; mere allegations are insufficient for relief.
Interim injunctions must consider the prima facie case and balance of convenience, especially where prior rights and public airing exist.
Interim injunctions must meet the triple test: prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss; ex-parte orders are justified in defamation cases where urgent protection is needed.
Injunction – While granting ad-interim injunctions in defamation suits, potential of using prolonged litigation to prevent free speech and public participation must also be kept in mind by courts.
The right to privacy in matrimonial matters is protected under Article 21, and courts must carefully balance this right against freedom of expression when considering interim injunctions in defamatio....
The Bar Council of India lacks authority to impose gag orders on advocates, infringing their fundamental right to free speech.
The judgment establishes that defamatory statements can be restrained by injunction if they threaten irreparable harm to a person's reputation, balancing free speech with the right to reputation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article