Delhi court lifts gag order on journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta in Adani case

A Delhi district court on Thursday lifted the gag order that had restrained journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta from reporting on the Adani Group, allowing him temporary relief until the trial court hears him and issues a new directive.

District judge Sunil Chaudhary stated that Thakurta would not be bound to comply with the earlier restraint order until the senior civil judge considers his arguments and passes a fresh order. The trial court has now been directed to hear the matter on 26 September at 2.00 pm.

“Needless to say that Ld. trial court while passing the fresh orders on the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC will consider the principles of law settled qua the grant of interim injunction. The appeal is disposed off accordingly and the appellant will not be liable to follow the order dated 06.09.2025 till fresh orders are passed by the court of Ld. Senior Civil Judge upon hearing him,” the judge observed.

The original gag order had been passed on 6 September by senior civil judge Anuj Kumar Singh of the Rohini Court. It directed the removal of allegedly defamatory content against Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) and restrained several journalists from publishing any further 'unverified and defamatory' information about the company.

In addition to naming five journalists, the civil judge had also issued an injunction against John Doe defendants (unidentified individuals).

Four journalists — Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi — had earlier challenged the order in a separate appeal. Their appeal was allowed by district judge Ashish Aggarwal on 18 September.

Thakurta's separate appeal was heard in detail over two days by district judge Chaudhary, who reserved his order on 24 September before pronouncing the verdict on Thursday.

The gag order has also been challenged by digital news platform Newslaundry, which published content related to the case. Journalist Ravish Kumar and Newslaundry have additionally contested the Central government's subsequent orders to remove online material deemed defamatory, which were issued based on the civil court’s injunction.

The legal proceedings began after AEL filed a defamation suit in the Rohini civil court, claiming that a number of journalists, activists, and media organisations had harmed its reputation and caused substantial financial losses by allegedly disseminating defamatory content.

In its complaint, AEL contended that these individuals and organisations were 'aligned with anti-India interests' and had targeted the group’s infrastructure and energy projects, which it claimed were vital to India’s economic and energy security. It accused them of acting with ulterior motives to disrupt these projects.

The company cited content published on paranjoy.in, adaniwatch.org, and adanifiles.com.au as repeated instances of defamation aimed at AEL, the Adani Group, and its founder and chairman Gautam Adani.

The civil judge had held that AEL had made out a prima facie case for interim relief, prompting the issuance of the original gag order — which then triggered the appeals process.

Representing Paranjoy Guha Thakurta were advocates Apar Gupta, Indumugi C., and Naman Kumar. Appearing for AEL were senior advocate Jagdeep Sharma along with Vijay Aggarwal, Naman Joshi, Ayush Jindal, R.K. Gossain, Verdaan Jain, Mukul Rathore, Rajat Jain, Rahul, Pragati Gupta, Kartikay Sharma, and Shreya.

With PTI inputs