'Gag Order': Activist Moves Delhi High Court Against Injunction In Hardeep Puri's Daughter's Defamation Suit Over Epstein Files Link Claims

Kunal Shukla, a Raipur based social activist, had moved the Delhi High Court challenging an injunction order directing him, as well as various others, to take down posts linking Himayani Puri, Union Minister Hardeep Puri's daughter, to American financier and child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The matter is slated to be heard on Monday by a division bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Renu Bhatnagar.

Calling it a “blanket pre-trial gag order”, Shukla, in his appeal, has said that he had published interrogative content based entirely on pre-existing, publicly available documents including SEC filings, international reports, and officially released material.

It is his case that the single judge has passed the injunction order at the very threshold, without notice and without affording any opportunity of hearing to him, thereby virtually decreeing the suit at the ad-interim stage itself.

“The Learned Single Judge has mechanically recorded the existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury, without any analysis of the material on record or the settled parameters governing grant of ex parte injunctions, particularly in defamation matters involving journalistic speech,” Shukla has said.

He has submitted that the impugned order ignores the settled principle that pre-trial injunctions in defamation actions ought not to be granted where the defendant raises a plausible defence of truth, justification, and fair comment based on public records.

The appeal also states that the Single Judge has failed to appreciate that Shukla's publications were based on “undisputed public domain material” and raised questions of significant public importance concerning financial dealings and associations of persons connected to public office.

As per Shukla, the content in question is neither palpably false nor malicious, and falls squarely within the protection of fair comment and public interest reporting.

“The impugned order, by restraining such speech at the threshold, amounts to unconstitutional prior restraint and has a chilling effect on free speech and investigative journalism, contrary to Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India,” the appeal states.

“It also overlooks the disproportionate nature of the relief granted, inasmuch as a blanket takedown has been ordered without examining whether a lesser restrictive measure would suffice,” it adds.

The appeal has been filed through Advocates Mayank Jain, Madhur Jain and Arpit Goel.

On March 17, the single judge had ordered social media platforms like Twitter, Google, YouTube, Meta and LinkedIn and other john doe entities to take down the allegedly defamatory content against the Cabinet Minister's daughter.

The judge however clarified that for the time being the Court will consider take down of content in India alone, since the 'global takedown' aspect is pending before a division bench of the High Court.

Himayani Puri had filed a Rs. 10 crore defamation suit seeking john doe order for taking down of the content.

Defendants 1-14 have been named in the suit and include journalists and social media platforms. Defendants 15-18 are government authorities. The remaining defendants are john doe (unidentifiable).

As per the suit, a coordinated and malicious online campaign has been orchestrated by the Defendants, purporting to link her to Jeffrey Epstein and his criminal activities.

She has said that the impugned publications continue to remain live, accessible, and widely circulated across social media, causing sustained reputational damage to her.

Title: Kunal Shukla v. Himayani Puri & Ors