IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A. P. Thaker, J.
Newsclick. In Publisher of Article Through Prabir Purkayastha – Appellant
Versus
Adani Power Rajasthan Limited – Respondent
R/Appeal From Order No. 172 of 2021, Civil Application (For Stay) No. 1 of 2021
Decided On : 01-04-2022
Defamation - Freedom of Speech - Articles published by Media House - Defamation of Supreme Court and Adani Group - [DEFAMATION] - [FREEDOM OF SPEECH] - [Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 499], [Constitution of India, Article 19(1)(a)]
Fact of the Case:
The defendant, a Media House, published two Articles discussing judgments of the Supreme Court regarding the Adani Group. The plaintiff filed a defamation suit, alleging the Articles were defamatory. The trial Court granted an interim injunction in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from publishing defamatory articles.
Finding of the Court:
The trial Court found the Articles prima facie defamatory, casting aspersions on the plaintiff and the Supreme Court. It emphasized the duty of the media to substantiate its stand with evidence and highlighted the importance of freedom of expression, subject to restrictions such as defamation. The Court directed expedited hearing of the suit.
Issues: Prima facie defamation of the plaintiff and the Supreme Court by the defendant's Articles.
Ratio Decidendi: The defendant's right to freedom of expression is subject to restrictions, including defamation. The duty is upon the defendant to establish the truth of defamatory statements. The trial Court's discretion in granting the interim injunction will not be interfered with unless exercised arbitrarily or perversely.
Final Decision: The appeal from the trial Court's order was dismissed, and the trial Court was directed to expedite the hearing of the suit.
JUDGMENT :
1. With the joint consent of the learned Senior Counsels and learned advocates appearing for the parties, the Appeal has been heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 6.3.2021 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below Exh-6 in Civil Suit No. 776 of 2020, whereby the learned Judge has passed the impugned order confirming the ‘ex-parte ad-interim injunction’ granted on 18.9.2020, the original defendant has preferred this Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
3. Pending the hearing and final disposal of the Suit, the defendants-appellants, their servants, agents or representative has been directed to refrain from stating, publishing, issuing, circulating, distributing, carrying out reports or Articles or reporting of any kind, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever either in print or electronic or any other form of media any defamatory story or article concerning the Respondent Company and Adani Group and from making publishing, circulating or causing or authorising to be published and circulated the words complained of or similar defamatory matter relating to the Respondent Company and Adani Group.
4. The appellants are the original defendants and the respondent is the original plaintiff before the trial Court. For brevity and convenience, the parties are referred to herein as per their status before the trial Court.
5. The brief facts, as emerged from the record, are as under:
5.1 Two Articles were published on Appellant No.1’s e-platform on September 7, 2020 titled “Justice Arun Mishra’s Final ‘Gift’ of Rs.8,000 crore to Adani” and on August 7, 2020, titled “Have Justice Arun Mishra’s Judgments helped Adani Group?” [hereinafter referred to as “Articles”], which pertained to the Respondent’s and the adjudication of their disputes by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. According to the appellants, the facts mentioned in the said Articles pertained to information which are widely available in the public domain and are topics which have been widely discussed by various tabloids and news agencies. According to the appellants, as a part of their profession, they have published the said Articles in public domain and have reported on the said issues which pertains to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India adjudicating upon the disputes regarding the Respondent.
6. The Respondent has filed the impugned Suit on 15.9.2020 and has alleged that the said Articles are defamatory in nature and have, accordingly, sought from the appellants jointly and/ or severally an amount of INR 100 Crores. The trial Court has initially issued ex-parte interim injunction on 18th September, 2020. The appellants have filed an application for vacation of interim relief granted by the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad and also filed the reply to the injunction application. According to the appellant, it being a Media House, owes a duty to the public to report on issues of public importance and thus the publication of the Articles in good faith was done in the larger public interest to generate debate and discussion on the facts available in public domain and the same cannot in any manner be construed to defame the Respondent and/ or the Hon’ble Supreme Court in any manner whatsoever. It has also contended that the Articles are based out of information that are publicly available topics which have been deliberated upon widely by the public at large. It is also contended that various publication houses in both print and digital media have published on the e-platform of appellant No.1. It is also contended that under no circumstances are the said Articles false and neither are they defamatory in nature. The Articles are merely discussion of the issues that are being discussed widely in the public and a reporting of the information in one place. According to the appellants, similar Articles and news have been reported by various news agencies and tabloids all over
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.