The Supreme Court of India has overturned a Delhi High Court order that directed the deletion of a Wikipedia page related to a defamation case involving Asian News International (ANI) and the Wikimedia Foundation. This landmark decision emphasizes the importance of open justice, media freedom, and the principles of free expression.
Background of the Case
The dispute began when ANI filed a defamation suit against the Wikimedia Foundation, alleging that certain content on a Wikipedia page titled “Asian News International v. Wikimedia Foundation” was defamatory. ANI claimed that the page contained misleading and defamatory content that harmed its reputation. In response, ANI sought an injunction to remove this content and demanded ₹2 crores in damages.
Read also: Supreme Court Urges Centre to Clear Collegium Recommendations to Address High Court Vacancies
On November 11, 2024, the Delhi High Court directed Wikimedia to delete the Wikipedia page in question, stating that the content could interfere with ongoing legal proceedings. Wikimedia, however, argued that it did not create the content but only hosted it, as Wikipedia is an open platform where content is user-generated.
The Delhi High Court had initially ruled that comments on the Wikipedia page criticizing the court's order were a violation of the principle of sub judice, which restricts public discussion on ongoing court cases. The High Court directed the Wikimedia Foundation to delete the Wikipedia page and related discussions within 36 hours.
Read also: Supreme Court Directs Grant of Disability Pension to Army Veteran Diagnosed with Schizophrenia
The High Court’s order was based on the view that the content amounted to interference in court proceedings and could impact the administration of justice. This led to an appeal by Wikimedia to the Supreme Court.
A Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reviewed the Delhi High Court's order and concluded that it was overly broad and violated the principles of open justice. The Supreme Court emphasized that courts, as public institutions, must remain open to public observation, debate, and criticism.
"It is not the duty of the Court to tell the media to delete this and take that down... Both the judiciary and the media are the foundational pillars of democracy, which is a basic feature of the Constitution," the bench remarked.
The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of maintaining a balance between the right to free speech and the administration of justice. It referred to the landmark judgment in Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. v. SEBI, which allows for postponement of publication of judicial proceedings only if there is a "real and substantial risk of prejudice."
The bench also cited the Naresh Mirajkar case, which established that public scrutiny of court proceedings is essential for maintaining public confidence in the judiciary.
This judgment reinforces the idea that media freedom and judicial transparency are fundamental to democracy. It acknowledges the media's role in reporting on court proceedings and ensures that courts do not become overly restrictive in managing criticism or public discussion.
The Supreme Court’s decision is a significant precedent, protecting the right to free speech while maintaining respect for judicial processes.
Case no. – SLP(C) No. 7748/2025 Diary No. 2483 / 2025
Case Title – Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v. ANI Media Private Limited
