Will Not Make New Requests For Take Down Of Reports By Newslaundry: Adani Enterprises Tells Delhi High Court

Adani Enterprises told the Delhi High Court on Thursday (September 25) that it will not make any fresh take down request with respect to news reports by digital news platform Newslaundry regarding the company. The submission was made by Senior Advocate Anurag Ahluwalia representing Adani Enterprises Limited before Justice Sachin Datta.The court was hearing pleas by digital news platform Newslaundry and journalist Ravish Kumar challenging Centre's direction asking digital news publishers to take down multiple reports and videos concerning the Adani Group of Companies.Senior Advocate Saurabh Kirpal appearing for Newslaundry along with Advocate Bani Dixit submitted, "Ex parte order passed against nine defendants and one john doe. Without notice, directing take-down. Some persons were named and served. They filed an appeal. There is a stay".Kirpal said that the appellate court had granted stay with respect to certain journalists on September 18. "Stayed only qua those who went in appeal. We are john doe defendant...," he added.Meanwhile senior advocate Trideep Pais appearing for Ravish Kumar said that a John Doe order is normally passed to curb further proliferation of an illegality.Kirpal said that when Newslaundry approached the appellate court, it issued notice. "Under what provisions has the government directed us to take down? Who informed them…. On September 16, they (Government) say take down in 36 hours. Government is not a party (to the suit). There are intermediary guidelines which prohibit defamatory articles. I am not an intermediary...," he added.Kirpal argued that the petitioner's relief in the present writ petition is against government order's of September 16.Kirpal further said, "Is it that the government is reading that 'I will still have to take down when the order is stayed qua other appellants?' Qua some appellants, it is stayed, order is communicated to us by the government..."Meanwhile the counsel appearing for the central government submitted that the IT Rules specify that when the government receives a court order, it has to communicate."So the government is simply acting as post office here? You are only passing court order to other party," the court asked. The government's counsel said that whenever the ministry receives request from a party about a court order, the government only communicates to the concerned that 'please implement the court order'. "The appellate court order is also informed to us. We immediately forwarded those orders also. My job is only to communicate. Thats all. If appellate court says stays, thats all," he added. Kirpal however said that the government has passed the order and Newslaundry had an issue with the order. The court at this stage remarked that the government has called upon the news platform to act on the basis of the latest court order.Kirpal however said, "I am not the appellant. Qua those who are not appellant, the order is not set aside. No one wants to live in a democracy where there is a threat that an order will be interpreted here and there. This is not part of the IT guidelines. This is about someone who got excited about the order".Referring to the definition of intermediary, Kirpal said, "This is like Facebook. Facebook does it on my behalf and then it becomes an intermediary. I am not the intermediary. I am the originator. I have stored it. Ruled 3(d) doesn't apply to me. Adani is here. They are not required to be heard. Let them move an impleadment. We are fighting a battle against them in Rohini Courts".Thereafter, Ahluwalia submitted that the same material in Newslaundry's petition is also present in their appeal before trial court. However Kirpal opposed the said submission. The court asked Ahluwalia, "Did you apprise the government of the order?" to which he responded in the affirmative. The court thereafter asked Adani Enterprises to move an impleadment application in the matter. As Kirpal pressed for stay, the court asked if Newslaundry had complied with the order to which Kirpal said, "I have not taken down. I am yet to comply". At this stage, Ahluwalia said, "We wont be asking (for take down of) any further material. Whatever has been (asked to) pull down is done." Kirpal then said that even he will take instructions, adding that the ex-parte gag order says that no new material will be uploaded.The court then remarked, "All that will be subject to the appellate court". To this Kirpal said, "That will stop my journalistic activity". Pais referred to the ex-parte gag order and submitted, "Hosts of material is cited in the plaint. Documents are filed…. This order gives power to the plaintiff (Adani Enterprises) to directly inform the intermediary". Pais then informed Court that even Ravish Kumar has filed an appeal before the trial court against the gag order. On this, Ahluwalia clarified that his instructions today were only for Newslaundry, as the factum of filing of Kumar's appeal was not within his knowledge.The parties then...

Will Not Make New Requests For Take Down Of Reports By Newslaundry: Adani Enterprises Tells Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags