LexWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC. versus ANI MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 1911 : 2025 INSC 656 Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v. ANI Media Private Limited & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 5391 of 2025) 09 May 2025 [Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose with respect to the legality and propriety of the directions issued by the Division Bench of the High Court to the appellant to take down/delete the pages and discussion with regard to the observations made by the High Court. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Arts.19(1)(a), 21 – Respondent had initiated a suit against the appellant wherein the Single Judge of the High Court passed an order dated 20.08.2024 – Later, an opinion piece was published in the Indian Express (E-edition) titled ‘why the case against Wikipedia in India is a challenge to freedom of speech and information’ – It was also hosted in the platform of the appellant – Appellant filed an appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court against the order dated 20.08.2024 – Pending said appeal, a video was posted about the case – A talk page was hosted on appellant’s platform opening up discussions on the ongoing proceedings before the High Court – Thereafter, Division Bench of the High Court issued directions against the appellant to take down/delete the said pages and discussions as it amounts to interference in court proceedings, violation of sub judice principle by a party to proceedings and borders on contempt – Legality thereof: Held: The judicial attitude to the sub judice principle or interference in court proceedings or contempt of court have been clearly spelt out by this Court – Words of this Court expressed through the nine-Judge Bench decision in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar : trial held subject to the public scrutiny and gaze naturally acts as a check against judicial caprice or vagaries and serves as a powerful instrument for creating confidence of the public in the fairness, * Author 1912 [2025] 5 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports objectivity and impartiality of the administration of justice – Courts, as a public and open institution, must always remain open to public observations, debates and criticisms – Infact, courts should welcome debates and constructive criticism – Every important issue needs to be vigorously debated by the people and the press, even if the issue of debate is sub judice before a court – However, those who offer criticism should remember that Judges cannot respond to such criticism but if a publication scandalizes the court or a Judge or Judges and if a case of contempt is made out, as highlighted by Justice Iyer in the sixth principle, certainly courts should take action – But it is not the duty of the court to tell the media: delete this, take that down – For the improvement of any system and that includes the judiciary, introspection is the key – That can happen only if there is a robust debate even on issues which are before the court – Both the judiciary and the media are the foundational pillars of democracy which is a basic feature of our Constitution – For a liberal democracy to thrive, both must supplement each other – The above position has become more nuanced in the digital age – Nonetheless, the Division Bench had reacted disproportionately while issuing the impugned directions – Impugned directions are set aside. [Paras 30-33] Constitution of India – Arts.19(1)(a), 21 – Freedom of speech and expression vis-à-vis sub judice principle or interference in court proceedings or contempt of court – Discussed. [Paras 22-31] Case Law Cited Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Mahrashtra [1966] SCR 744 : AIR 1967 SC 1; Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India [2012] 12 SCR 256 : (2012) 10 SCC 603 – followed. In Re S. Mulgaokar [1978] 3 SCR 162 : (1978) 3 SCC 339 – relied on. Reliance Petrochemicals Limited v. Proprietors of Indian Express Newspapers [1988] Supp. 3 SCR 212 : (1988) 4 SCC 592; Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India [2018] 11 SCR 57 : (2018) 10 SCC 639; Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 678; Ramesh Kumaran v. State, 2025 SCC OnLine 667 – referred to. [2025] 5 S.C.R. 1913 Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v. ANI Media Private Limited & Ors. List of Acts Constitution of India; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. List of Keywords Criticism of court proceedings; Censorship; Threat to the flow of information; Legality and propriety of directions;
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.