No relief to Ajay Gupta from Delhi High Court, Zee Media allowed to keep their content online

An application for interim relief accompanying the suit prayed for interim orders to take down/delete the five broadcasts/publications and further prayed for restraint on further publications against the Plaintiff and his brothers.

File Photo

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court declined to pass interim orders against Zee Media and Diligent Media Corporation Ltd. to take down/delete the publications/posts in a suit filed by Ajay Kumar Gupta.  

An urgent suit for defamation and permanent injunction was filed by Ajay Kumar Gupta through Karanjawala and Co. before the Delhi High Court, being aggrieved by the episode hosted on July 14, 2021 by Zee News titled - 'DNA : What is the connection of South Africa riots to India Gupta Family' and an article published on July 16, 2021 by DNA India titled - 'DNA Explainer: What led to unrest in South Africa and role of Gupta brothers'. 

An application for interim reliefs accompanying the suit prayed for interim orders to take down/delete the five broadcasts/publications and further prayed for restraint on further publications against the Plaintiff and his brothers.  

Rajiv Nayyar and Mr Sidharth Bhatnagar, senior advocates appearing for Gupta alleged that the contents of the publications are per se defamatory and vehemently argued that an interim direction be passed to Zee Media/ DNA to take down/delete the impugned posts forthwith.  

Arvind Nayar, Sr. Advocate instructed by Ritwika Nanda & Petal Chandhok, Partners, Trust Legal appeared on behalf of Zee Media, Mr Sudhir Chaudhary and Diligent Media Corporation Ltd. The suit and the interim reliefs were opposed by the Defendants on the ground of maintainability for lack of territorial jurisdiction of the Hon’ble High Court in the light of recent orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in 2019 and 2020. It was further argued that the information related to the Plaintiff and his brothers are widely available in the public domain and further that the publications by the Defendants were not defamatory.  

After hearing the parties, the Hon’ble High Court declined to pass any interim relief in favour of the Plaintiff for the take-down/deletion of the impugned publications. No interim orders restraining the Defendants from further publication were passed. The High Court directed that prior to any further telecast by the Defendants, version of the Plaintiffs be taken and further directed that in respect of impugned posts, the précis of the comments of the  Plaintiff be published.