In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India on April 17, 2025, set aside the Delhi High Court's injunction order that had directed the removal of allegedly defamatory and false content from the Wikipedia page related to news agency ANI Media Private Limited.
The bench, comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, noted that the High Court’s directive—asking for the deletion of “all false, misleading, and defamatory content”—was “very broadly worded” and therefore, not practically enforceable.
“Such a broadly framed injunction is incapable of being implemented,” the Supreme Court observed.
However, the apex court clarified that this decision does not prevent ANI from seeking a fresh injunction from the single judge of the Delhi High Court, focusing on specific defamatory content rather than a general takedown.
Read Also:- SC Bench Divided on Disciplinary Action Against AoR and Advocate Over Misconduct in Petition Filing
Background of the Case
The case stems from a defamation suit filed by ANI against the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that hosts Wikipedia. The suit targeted content on the Wikipedia page titled “Asian News International”, which ANI claimed damaged its credibility and questioned its editorial independence.
The disputed content alleged that ANI:
- Has served as a propaganda tool for the central government.
- Disseminated material from numerous fake news networks.
- Misreported facts and events.
ANI asserted that the statements were false, defamatory, and intended to malign its reputation. The agency sought Rs. 2 crore in damages and asked for the removal of the objectionable content.
In an interim order on April 2, 2025, Justice Subramonium Prasad of the Delhi High Court had:
- Directed Wikimedia to take down the alleged defamatory statements.
- Observed that the material was ex-facie defamatory.
- Held that Wikipedia couldn’t shirk responsibility by claiming it was a neutral online intermediary.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Slams DPS Dwarka for Discrimination Against Students Over Fee Dispute
Additionally, the court:
- Ordered removal of the protected status on ANI’s Wikipedia page, which had restricted public editing.
- Noted that the disputed content stemmed from editorial and opinion articles that had been misrepresented.
- Stated that the protection effectively put ANI at a disadvantage in countering the misinformation.
Wikimedia challenged this decision, leading to a division bench order on April 8, 2025, which:
- Partially stayed the single judge's directive, including the enforcement of the order to remove the protection status.
- Upheld the direction for taking down the allegedly defamatory content.
The bench further stated that if ANI reports additional defamatory content via email, Wikipedia must:
- Comply with the Information Technology Rules within 36 hours.
- Failing compliance, ANI may approach the Court for redress.
This direction was also contested by Wikimedia in the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP).
The Supreme Court, while allowing Wikimedia’s SLP, emphasized that the Delhi High Court’s blanket injunction could not stand as it lacked precision and clarity.
“An injunction must be narrowly tailored to specific content that has been judicially found to be defamatory,” said the bench.
Importantly, the Court allowed ANI the liberty to approach the High Court again, this time with a well-defined plea targeting specific portions of the Wikipedia entry.
Other Developments in the Case
- On November 11, 2024, the Delhi High Court closed Wikimedia’s appeal against an earlier direction to disclose subscriber details of three users who had edited ANI’s page, after a consent order was reached.
- In a related contempt case, the Delhi High Court took objection to another Wikipedia page titled “Asian News International v. Wikimedia Foundation,” which mentioned a judge had threatened to shut down Wikipedia in India. This was seen as misrepresentation of court proceedings.
- On April 9, 2025, during hearings, the Supreme Court reserved its judgment and noted that any take-down order for contempt must be based on a prima facie finding, supported by reasons.
“Before passing any takedown order on grounds of contempt, courts must clearly determine whether the content is contemptuous,” the Supreme Court remarked.
Case No.: SLP(C) No. 10637/2025
Case Title: Wikimedia Foundation Inc v. ANI Media Private Limited and Others
