Gavel Falls on Censorship: Court Lifts Ban on Adani Reporting
(By: Syed Ali Taher Abedi)
New Delhi, September 18, 2025 — In a landmark ruling underscoring the importance of press freedom and procedural fairness, a Delhi court has quashed an ex-parte gag order that had restrained four independent journalists from publishing allegedly defamatory content about the Adani Group.
The gag order, originally passed on September 6, 2025, had barred journalists Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi from disseminating or republishing investigative articles concerning the Adani Group. The order was issued without prior notice or hearing, prompting the journalists to file an appeal challenging its legality and urgency.
The matter was heard by District Judge Ashish Agarwal of the Rohini Courts, who delivered a strongly worded judgment in favor of the journalists. The court emphasized that the articles in question had been in the public domain since June 2024, and therefore did not warrant an emergency injunction.
“The civil judge ought to have granted the journalists an opportunity to be heard before passing an order which had the impact of prima facie declaring the articles as defamatory and even directing their removal,” Judge Agarwal stated.
The court further observed that the original order lacked a proper judicial assessment of whether the content was indeed defamatory, and had instead relied solely on the plaintiff’s assertions.
Representing the journalists, Advocate Vrinda Grover argued that the gag order amounted to a violation of their constitutional right to free speech and a free press. She highlighted that the publications were part of legitimate investigative journalism and had already been widely circulated, making the restraint both redundant and disproportionate.
Legal experts say the ruling sets a precedent for safeguarding journalistic freedom in civil defamation cases, especially when interim orders are sought without hearing the affected parties. It also reinforces the judiciary’s role in balancing reputational concerns with the public’s right to know.
The Adani Group has not yet issued a public response to the court’s decision.
This case adds to the growing discourse around corporate influence, media independence, and the boundaries of defamation law in India. As the dust settles, it serves as a reminder that the press, even when scrutinizing powerful entities, must be protected from undue silencing.
The journalists were represented by Advocates Vrinda Grover, Soutik Banarjee and DevikaTulsiani
