Delhi High Court fights Wikipedia for defamation and ANI

Hearing the ongoing defamation battle between Wikipedia and Asian News International (ANI), the Delhi High Court on Monday told the platform that there is nothing worse for a news agency than being called a puppet of an spy agency or a stooge of the government. .

Division bench consisting of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela heard An appeal filed by the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts Wikipedia, against a single judge’s ruling ordering the disclosure of the follower data of three individuals who edited Wikipedia’s ANI page.

During the hearing, the bench noted that the complaint in the suit makes “very serious allegations” against ANI. CJ Manmohan further noted that the single judge was very careful before passing the impugned order and gave sufficient time to Wikipedia to file its reply in the case, which it did not do.

“The single judge was very careful. It gives you notice, which can be returned in almost four weeks, and says: send a response. You are not filing a response… Many people think that this is a one-sided order. This is not a unilateral order. The single judge very, very deliberately issues a notice on the first day asking for a response. When the answer does not come, he says that this must be done,– said the bench.

He added:

“We have informed you that we have reviewed the complaint. The lawsuit discloses very serious allegations that could damage someone’s good name and reputation. We asked you to put your client in the same place where the defendant stands before us. You would have to admit to us that they are in themselves scandalous, slanderous, if their truth were not proven. You are accusing someone of being a puppet of the Central Intelligence Agency. I think there is nothing worse when a news agency is called a puppet of the intelligence service or a puppet of the government. If this is true, then his credibility decreases.»

CJ Manmohan also noted that previously the worst insult one politician would insult another was that “you are a puppet of the Central Intelligence Agency” and the biggest insult in Parliament was that “the leader of this opposition party is the CIA” .

“When accusations like these are made, they are serious accusations. You will say that I am a mediator. I didn’t do anything. Who will defend these charges? You do not disclose the author’s name. If you do not reveal the name of the author, take on the protection of the intermediary, then all this will become a cover to hide behind a veil of anonymity and be sure that the case will not be continued. He (ANI) will have no protection. He won’t have a cure. He cannot be left defenseless, if he is called a puppet of the RAW agency, he will have to defend himself,– said the bench.

CJ Manmohan also told Wikipedia that the platform is doing an amazing job of providing an open source encyclopedia, but in such a state, someone could sneak into its work.

“And if one intelligence agency works against another… Someone will have to act as an arbiter and decide this. The courts will have to intervene. But the problem today is that the moment someone interferes with the resolution of a dispute, it becomes a dispute, and your mediator has started a page about the court as if we are the problem. We solve problems. We’ve become a problem– said CJ.

The judge was referring to a special Wikipedia page dedicated to a pending libel case. The court had previously expressed displeasure over the matter after it found that the page wrote: “The judge in the case has threatened to order the Indian government to shut down Wikipedia in the country.”

He added: “This is a unique thing that is coming. You will be providing a unique service to humanity. But at the same time, mistakes can happen in any department, and you need to have a corrective mechanism. He (ANI) is studying this corrective mechanism. I think he will have to speak out in court. This is not to say that he will not have a say in court. How will he speak in court until you reveal the author of the article? If you, if your version is correct, please defend it with all your might. Please protect this. Nobody says you will be defenseless. No one takes away your right to defense. This court is not saying you will go to jail. Nobody says this. Please have the courage to defend what you have said. But to say that I am a mediator. I won’t interfere in this. I am not responsible and will not tell you who the author is, how will things go then? This can’t happen.»

Senior advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for Wikipedia, said this before ordering the disclosure of the persons. individual, the Single Judge had to come to a prima facie conclusion that the content in question was itself defamatory. He also said that the single judge did not take into account the fact that the disputed content has been on Wikipedia since 2020 and the lawsuit was filed only in 2024.

“The single judge may have said that since you have come after such a long time, we will not immediately issue disclosure orders, and it is necessary to listen to the mediator,– Sibal objected.

He added: “On the day when we sought additional time to file our evidence and time was granted, all these strong arguments did not take place whether it was sufficient to support the order without even establishing a prima facie view that it itself is slanderous? That’s all I’m saying.»

The bench has now directed the parties to file their replies and posted the appeal for hearing on October 28.

ANI’s counsel Advocate Siddhant Kumar said that he will not present before the single judge the application filed under Order 39 Rule 2A of the CrPC on October 25, the next date of hearing.

The bench then clarified that ANI is entitled to file the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 in accordance with law.

The court was also informed today that Wikipedia has removed a page dedicated to the ongoing libel case. Bench thus ending a fresh contempt suit filed by ANI against Wikipedia for failing to comply with a timely takedown order.

The controversy arose after ANI filed a defamation suit against Wikipedia over an allegedly defamatory description of the news agency.

On August 20, the court ordered Wikipedia to disclose to ANI the subscriber data of three individuals available to it within two weeks. ANI then filed a contempt suit against Wikipedia, alleging that it failed to comply with the order in question.

ANI sought to restrain Wikipedia from publishing allegedly defamatory content on the news agency’s page on its platform. He also demanded that the content be removed. ANI also demanded Rs. 2 crore damage from Wikipedia.

The Wikipedia page says ANI”has been criticized for serving as a propaganda tool for the current central government, spreading material from a vast network of fake news websites and distorting events.»

In its complaint against the Wikimedia Foundation and its officials, ANI said the former allegedly published patently false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing and discrediting the reputation of the news agency.

Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors.