In a recent development, the Delhi High Court has partially upheld an earlier single judge's order that directed Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that operates Wikipedia, to remove allegedly defamatory content from the Wikipedia page of ANI Media Private Limited (Asian News International).
The division bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, also issued a partial stay on the same order.
“This court is of the opinion that until the appeal is finally heard, the relief granted is restricted to the first part of prayer b of the injunction. The remaining injunction of prayer c and later part of prayer b is stayed,” — Delhi High Court
- The direction to remove defamatory content remains in place.
- However, the order restraining Wikipedia’s users and admins from publishing any further defamatory content and the removal of the protection status of the ANI Wikipedia page has been put on hold for now.
The division bench emphasized the dynamic nature of Wikipedia, noting that content can change daily.
Read also: Delhi High Court: Woman’s Suicide Outside Matrimonial Home Still Counts As Dowry Death
“During the pendency of the suit it is seen that the content on Wikipedia page is not static. The nature of the platform itself is such that content is continuously dynamic.” — Delhi High Court
The court made it clear that if ANI finds any new defamatory content on its Wikipedia page, it can report it via email, and Wikipedia must act in accordance with IT Rules.
If the reported content is not removed within 36 hours, ANI has the right to approach the court with a fresh application.
“If any other content comes to notice of plaintiff, same shall be brought to notice of platform through counsel,” — Delhi High Court
The Bench acknowledged Wikipedia’s claim that it is merely an intermediary and the content is added by independent third-party volunteers.
However, the court clarified that intermediaries too have responsibilities.
“Wikipedia is nothing but an online encyclopedia. In cases of such platforms, the intention of the publisher ought to be to take a neutral stance.” — Delhi High Court
“In terms of IT Rules, the intermediary has an obligation to make efforts not to publish any objectionable content.” — Delhi High Court
The court added that if the published information is false or untrue, Wikipedia is obliged to remove such content within 36 hours upon receiving a court order.
Background of the Case:
Wikipedia had filed an appeal against the single judge's April 2 order, which directed the platform to delete allegedly defamatory statements on ANI’s Wikipedia page titled “Asian News International.”
The single judge had observed that Wikipedia could not escape liability by simply claiming to be an intermediary. The statements posted were said to be opinionated editorials, not verified factual reporting.
ANI had filed a defamation suit worth ₹2 crore against Wikimedia Foundation, alleging that the content published was false, malicious, and defamatory.
The content accused ANI of:
- Acting as a propaganda tool for the central government.
- Distributing materials from fake news websites.
- Misreporting events.
In August last year, the single judge ordered Wikipedia to disclose subscriber details of three individuals associated with the allegedly defamatory edits within two weeks. Wikipedia had challenged this order too.
Wikipedia created a dedicated page titled “Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation”, which commented on the defamation proceedings.
The page claimed:
“The judge in the case has threatened to order the government of India to shut down Wikipedia in the country.”
This triggered strong objection from the division bench, which later ordered the removal of that Wikipedia page, stating that it made adverse and contemptuous remarks against the judge.
Eventually, the appeal by Wikipedia was disposed of after both parties entered into a consent order and settled the matter amicably.
The division bench then allowed the single judge to continue hearing the ongoing defamation suit.
In a recent development, the Supreme Court of India issued a notice regarding Wikipedia’s appeal against the Delhi High Court’s division bench order which directed the removal of the disputed Wikipedia page.
“The single judge heard the parties and had given a prima facie opinion that content is defamatory.” — Delhi High Court Bench
In November, Justice Prasad had issued summons to three individuals who were believed to be involved in editing ANI's Wikipedia page with the objectionable content.
Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI Media
