On Monday, the Delhi High Court strongly disapproved of a Wikipedia page detailing ongoing legal proceedings in a defamation suit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against the Wikimedia Foundation. The court has directed Wikipedia to remove the page titled ‘Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation,’ emphasising that it cannot be used to threaten or intimidate the judicial process.
The defamation suit, which demanded Rs. 2 crore in damages, was initiated after ANI alleged that Wikipedia had published false and defamatory statements about the news agency. The content in question reportedly accuses ANI of serving as a propaganda tool for the central government, spreading misinformation through a network of fake news sites.
The page contained remarks suggesting that the court had threatened to order the shutdown of Wikipedia in India — a statement that the court condemned. A bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rai Gedela made it clear that such content must be taken down immediately for the case to proceed, warning that failure to do so would prevent Wikipedia from being heard in the case, reports Live Law.
“You may be a powerful entity globally, but in this country, we are governed by law,” Chief Justice Manmohan remarked.
The case concerns ANI’s objections to allegedly defamatory content on its Wikipedia page. The news agency argues that the platform’s anonymity features have shielded those editing the page, thereby preventing ANI from seeking accountability.
In August 2024, the court ordered Wikimedia to disclose the details of three individuals who edited ANI’s page, but ANI has since accused the platform of not complying with this directive.
Wikimedia’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, defended the platform’s editorial and operational policies, highlighting its reliance on anonymity as a cornerstone of its service. Sibal argued that Wikipedia operates as a neutral intermediary that is not responsible for content creation and emphasised concerns over the potential erosion of user privacy if the court-mandated disclosure of the individuals behind the edits.
However, the court took issue with this defence, warning that Wikipedia’s legal protections under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act — commonly known as the ‘safe harbour’ provision — could be at risk.
This provision exempts intermediaries from liability for third-party content, provided they do not exercise editorial control. The court suggested that by shielding the individuals behind the edits, Wikipedia may have overstepped its role as a neutral intermediary.
“You run the risk of losing your Section 79 protection if you continue to defend this kind of activity,” the bench warned.
During the hearing, the bench made pointed remarks about the tension between free speech and defamation, emphasising that Wikipedia’s platform cannot be used to protect defamatory statements. The court expressed concern over the severity of the accusations levelled against ANI, including allegations that the news agency is a government propaganda tool and has ties to India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW).
Sibal notes that the individuals in question are Wikipedia administrators, not employees and that Wikipedia operates under International precedents that protect freedom of speech. He argued that no injunction had been granted by the lower court and assured that Wikipedia would file its response to the defamation suit within the week.
As the legal battle between ANI and Wikipedia intensifies, the court has scheduled the next hearing for October 25. Wikimedia is expected to present its formal defence. However, the bench clarified that further delays or failures to comply with the court’s directives could result in severe legal consequences for the platform.
In the News: Entry points in open-source ecosystems can be exploited: Research