Logo

Delhi High Court Questions Media Defamation Claims, Reserves Verdict in Newslaundry Case

Shivam Y.

TV Today Network Pvt Ltd and Other Connected Matter - Delhi High Court criticises offensive language by Newslaundry but says not all media criticism of Aaj Tak or India Today is disparagement.

Delhi High Court Questions Media Defamation Claims, Reserves Verdict in Newslaundry Case
Join Telegram

The Delhi High Court on Thursday 22 January delivered sharp oral observations while hearing a long-running dispute between TV Today Network and digital news platform Newslaundry, drawing a clear line between offensive language and legitimate media criticism. While the court strongly disapproved of certain words used by a Newslaundry journalist, it also cautioned TV Today against treating every critical comment as defamatory or disparaging

Background of the Case

The dispute dates back to 2021, when TV Today Network owner of popular news channels Aaj Tak and India Today filed a civil suit against Newslaundry. The network accused the digital platform, its editors, and journalists of copyright infringement, defamation, and disparagement through a series of online videos and articles.

Read also:- Calcutta High Court Denies Bail to Prayag Group Chiefs in ₹2,800 Crore Money Laundering Case

TV Today alleged that Newslaundry had used substantial portions of its broadcast clips and made false and damaging remarks against its channels, anchors, and management. It sought damages of ₹2 crore and removal of the content.

In July 2022, a single judge of the High Court declined to grant interim relief to TV Today but observed that a prima facie case existed. Both sides challenged that order TV Today seeking stronger relief and Newslaundry objecting to the adverse observations.

Court’s Observations on Language Used

The Bench Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla expressed serious concern over the language used by Newslaundry journalist Manisha Pande in one of the videos, particularly the use of the word “shit” while referring to content aired by Good News Today, a TV Today channel.

Read also:- Madras HC Slams Police Inaction in Pachaiyappa’s Trust Case, Seeks Explanation from Top Officers

The court described the expression as “gross” and unacceptable in professional journalism.

Justice Hari Shankar remarked in open court,

She doesn’t know the fundamentals of decency in reporting. There has to be a limit to everything. We may pass an order which can place her entire career in disarray.”

The Bench even indicated that it could consider impleading the journalist personally if required.

Criticism vs Disparagement

At the same time, the court made it clear that TV Today could not label every uncomfortable or harsh comment as disparagement.

Read also:- Advocate Should Advise Against Frivolous Litigation, Not Act as Mouthpiece: Allahabad HC

Referring to multiple videos placed on record, the Bench observed that phrases such as “method anchoring,” “thoda drama thoda gimmick,” “soap opera,” or “killing sports journalism Aaj Tak style” were expressions of criticism and opinion.

“This is criticism. How is this disparaging?” Justice Shankar observed, adding, “Even if someone says your programme is absolute nonsense, that is still a comment. It does not automatically become disparagement.”

The court also told TV Today that it appeared to be “over sensitive” by including dozens of videos in the suit, thereby weakening its own case.

Copyright and Fair Use Debate

TV Today’s counsel argued that Newslaundry had used entire broadcast clips, crossing the boundary of fair use under copyright law. The Bench, however, questioned whether showing parts of a clip for the purpose of criticism could be completely barred.

Read also:- Leopard Attack or Murder? Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Key Accused in Shocking Yavat Killing Case

Justice Shankar asked pointedly,

“Is there an absolute bar on using any part of a video to comment on it?”

Newslaundry’s counsel responded that the clips were always attributed to TV Today and used only to highlight and critique the content being aired.

Court’s Decision

After hearing detailed arguments from both sides on language, defamation, criticism, and copyright, the Division Bench stated that it would refrain from commenting on the present state of the media.

“We are restricting ourselves,” Justice Hari Shankar said.

The Delhi High Court then reserved its judgment in both appeals.

Case Title:- TV Today Network Pvt Ltd and Other Connected Matter