"Why Touchy About Comments On Court Proceedings?" Supreme Court On Delhi HC Order To Remove Wikipedia Page On ANI's Defamation Suit

The Supreme Court on Monday (March 17) issued notice on a petition filed by Wikimedia Foundation against an order passed by the Delhi High Court directing the removal of a Wikipedia page and discussions related to ongoing defamation proceedings initiated by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against Wikipedia.During the hearing, the bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed concerns about the High Court's direction and the observation that the content amounted to interference with ongoing court proceedings."We are concerned with the legality and validity of the directions issued by the High Court in paragraph No. 5 of the impugned order," the bench observed while issuing notice to the ANI, returnable on April 4.In the impugned order, a division bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela of the Delhi High Court directed the takedown of a Wikipedia page titled "Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation.” The High Court took exception to comments on the page which it found to be prima facie contemptuous, particularly a statement that a judge had threatened to order the shutdown of Wikipedia in India. The HC further noted that the content on the page and subsequent discussions interfered with court proceedings.In the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Wikimedia, argued that the issue was serious and contended that the High Court had passed an order without making a finding on defamation. "It is just not possible," he submitted. He added that the concerned content was not of Wikimedia but taken from an Indian Express article.Justice Oka observed that comments and criticism about court proceedings were not unusual. “In this Court, we say things, and somebody wants to comment upon it... this happens. Sometimes somebody says that you are sitting here with a preconceived mind or that you are not giving a hearing. People say things, and we have to tolerate it," he said.Justice Oka expressed concerns about an order to remove material simply because it criticized the court's observations. “We can understand if there is a contempt, and contempt is proved pursuant to notice. Somebody wants to purge the contempt, so he removes that content. But to tell somebody to remove something because there is some criticism of what the Court has done, that may not be correct” he remarked.Justice Oka further remarked, “To bring the best out of the lawyers, sometimes we say so many things in open court. Now, if the court says something orally and, on social media, somewhere there is a comment offered, why should the court be touchy about such comments...Somebody discusses something which happens in the court, will that amount to interference?"When ANI's counsel pointed out that the individuals responsible for the statements were not before the court, Justice Oka observed, “You are missing an important point. Ultimately, this is the media. The question is about the freedom of the media.”ANI's counsel said that the copy of the correct article is also not on record. The Court allowed ANI to bring the correct article on record by filing a counter affidavit by the end of the month.BackgroundThe dispute originates from a defamation suit filed by ANI against Wikipedia, alleging defamatory content regarding ANI's credibility and editorial policies. ANI sought damages amounting to Rs. 2 crores and the removal of the content. Wikipedia was also directed by the court to disclose the subscriber details of three individuals who had edited ANI's Wikipedia page, an order that Wikimedia contested.Subsequently, on November 11, 2024, the Delhi High Court closed Wikimedia's appeal against the single judge's order directing disclosure of the individuals' subscriber details. This came after both parties entered into a consent order resolving the matter. The division bench allowed Wikipedia to serve summons on the individuals and permitted the single judge to proceed with ANI's defamation suit in accordance with the law.Following the removal of the contested Wikipedia page, the High Court also closed ANI's contempt plea against Wikimedia. Thereafter, the Single bench of the Delhi High Court issued summons to three individuals who allegedly edited ANI's Wikipedia page while dealing with the defamation suit filed by ANI against Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Wikipedia platform.Case no. – Diary No. 2483 / 2025Case Title – Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v. ANI Media Private Limited

"Why Touchy About Comments On Court Proceedings?" Supreme Court On Delhi HC Order To Remove Wikipedia Page On ANI's Defamation Suit

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags