खरी-अखरी – हैरान भर नहीं आखिरी उम्मीदों को तोड़ते दिख रहे हैं अदालती आदेश

हैरान भर नहीं आखिरी उम्मीदों को तोड़ते दिख रहे हैं अदालती आदेश

17 सितम्बर का दिन भारत के इतिहास में “अदाणी वीडियो टेकडाउन” दिवस के रूप में मनाया जाना चाहिए। यू-ट्यूबरों पर विजय प्राप्ति के उपलक्ष्य में महान अदाणी भी अपने चैनलों पर कार्यक्रम कर सकते हैं। मोमबत्ती प्रज्वलन के साथ पथ संचलन कर सकते हैं। जन्मदिन की पूर्व संध्या पर सूचना प्रसारण मंत्रालय ने अदाणी से जुड़े मुद्दों पर बनाये गये 138 वीडियो के टेकडाउन के आदेश दिए हैं। भारत के लाखों यू-ट्यूबर प्रधानमंत्री को शुभकामनाएं तो भेजें ही अदाणी जी की तस्वीर के सामने अगरबत्ती जला कर प्रार्थना करें कि उनका वीडियो सलामत रहे। टेकडाउन का नोटिस नहीं आए। ये टिप्पणी वरिष्ठ पत्रकार रविश कुमार की है जो उन्होंने दिल्ली की एक अदालत के बाद भारत सरकार के सूचना प्रसारण मंत्रालय द्वारा जारी आदेश के संदर्भ में की है। दरअसल भारत के सबसे धनाढ्यपतियों में से एक गौतम अदाणी ग्रुप की एक कंपनी अदाणी इंटरप्राइजेज ने दिल्ली की एक अदालत में देश के प्रतिष्ठित यू-ट्यूबर्स के खिलाफ मानहानि का मुकदमा दायर किया था जिस एक पक्षीय सुनवाई करते हुए अदालत ने एक पक्षीय निर्णय पारित करते हुए आरोपी बनाये गये यू-ट्यूबर्स को आदेश दिया कि अदाणी के खिलाफ बनाये गये 138 वीडियो तथा 83 इंट्राग्राम पोस्ट को डिलीट कर दिया जाय। इसी तारतम्य में भारत सरकार के सूचना प्रसारण मंत्रालय ने भी एक आदेश जारी कर अदालत द्वारा दिये गये आदेश का पालन करने को कहा है।

Government of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting 16.09.2025 – Digital News publishare – Subject – Compliance to court order – Adani Enterprise Ltd. V Paranjoy Guha Thakur आता & Ors. (order dated 06.09.2025) take Down of Defamatory content. Reg. I am directed to refer to the order dated 06.09.2025 in the matter of Adani Enterprise Ltd. V Paranjoy Guha Thakurata & Ors. (C. S. SCJ 1066 of 2025) before the Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge Rohini Court Delhi (copy enclosed) the lists of links are also enclosed herewith. The Hon’ble Court vide aforementioned order has directed defendents no 01 to 10 to expunge/remove all defamatory material from their respective articles/Social media posts within 5 days of the said order. However it has come to notice of this ministry that the above said order has not been complied with within the stipulated timeline. Accordingly you are directed to take appropriate action for compliance of the aforementioned order and submit the action taken to the ministry within 36 hours of the issue of this communication. This issue with the approval of the competent Authority.

गौतम अडाणी से जूड़े हुए मामले में सूचना प्रसारण मंत्रालय ने सक्रियता दिखाई है उससे मीडिया जगत में इसे प्रधानमंत्री नरेन्द्र मोदी के 75 वें जन्मदिन की पूर्व संध्या पर दिया गया रिटर्न गिफ्ट माना जा रहा है वह भी अपरोक्ष रूप से गौतम अडाणी के अदृश्य हाथों।

The Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on Tuesday (September 16) sent notices to two media houses and a number on you Tube channels ordering them to take down a total of 138 videos and 83 Instagram posts that mentioned the Adani Group. These orders the ministry stated in a letter dated Tuesday, was based on an ex part order issued by the The North West Delhi district court on September 6 in a defamation case filled by Adani Enterprises. The court had told a number of journalists and activists including Paranjoy Guha Thakurata, Ravi Nair, Abir dasgupta, Ayaskanti Das and Ayush Joshi to take down articles and social media posts that allegedly defamed the Adani Group. As ex part order is issued when some parties to case – in this case the journalists and activists involved are not heard. Those who received notices from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry on Tuesday however, are not party to that case.

The wire too has been served this notice on Tuesday for a solitary Instagram post that referred to allegation levelled by the US securities and Exchange commission against the Adani Group, which are matters of record, others who have been included in the take down orders are News laundry, Ravish Kumar, Ajit Anjum, Dhruv Rathee, Akash Banerjee, aka Deshbhakt and others. Several of the videos flagged did not necessarily contain any new reportage or opinion. For in stance one of the News laundry videos that is listed is a subscription appeal that merely features a screen shot of an article about the Adani Group. The ministry’s letter states that the publications had failed to take action in the time frame stipulated by the court order. Accordingly, you are directed to take appropriate action for compliance of the aforementioned order, and submit the action taken to the ministry within 36 hours of the issue of this communication it reads. Copies of the notice were also worked to meta platforms Inc and Google Inc.
Episode of TV Newsance along with an explaine on how the cases against NDTVs former owner Pranv Roy and Radhika Roy were closed after the Adani takeover of the Channel also featured on the list. Roposts on the Dharavi Project and episodes of News laundry’s weekly podcast NL Haffa, NL charcha and NL Tippani also feature on the list. Three videos of journalist Atul Chaurasia, includes ones where he discusses the case against Adani in the US. The ministry has also asked the interviews of NCP leaders Sharad Pawar and Ajit Pawar by journalist Sreenivasan Jain to be removed. In these interviews both leaders confirmed that Gautam Adani hosted a High-profile meeting in 2019, in which the possibility of the Nationalist Congress Party supporting the Bharatiya Janta Party was discussed. It also includes three videos done by the News minute including one episode case of South Central and Let Me Explain, which were hosted on the News laundry YouTube channel.

Adani wins court order that flip free speech on its head. A Delhi Judge let the company compile its own blacklist of ‘defamatory’ journalism platforms must deletes flagged content within 36 hours.

On September 6 a Delhi district court granted Adani Enterprises Ltd’s prayer for an ex part injunction to restrain nine journalists and organisations, along with unnamed others, from publishing or circulating ‘unverified, unsubstantiated and exfacie defamatory’ material about the company. The court ordered takedowns across platforms. It is a ‘John Deo’ order, which restrains even those not specifically named in the case. More striking Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh of the Rohini District Courts handed Adani a censorship pipeline. He allowed the company to keep sending URLs and links of articles or posts that the company considers “alleged defamatory material” to interact inter mediaries or government agencies, who must then take them down within 36 hours. Adani has been given blanket liberty to compile its own rolling blacklist and have platforms erase it without further judicial serutiny, until the court says otherwise.

Wire – – I&B Ministry orders Takedown of 138 Videos, 83 Instagram Posts About Adani Using Ex-Part Court Order Aakas Banerjee, aka Deshbhakt, amongst other youTubers have been named this order.

गुजरात में भी एक कोर्ट ने भी अडाणी ग्रुप द्वारा दायर एक मानहानि के मामले में वरिष्ठ पत्रकार अभिसार शर्मा सहित राजू पारूलेकर को समंस जारी कर अदालत में तलब किया है।

Gujarat court issues notices to two Journalists on Adani Group’s defamation complaint. Adani Groups accused Abhishar Sharma, a youTuber and Raju Parulekar a blogger of spreading false and defamatory content to malign its reputation. A court in Gandhinagar has issued notices to journalists Abhishar Sharma and Raju Parulekar for personal appearance September 20 after criminal defamation complaints were filled against them by Adani Group. The business conglomerate accused Mr. Sharma, a youTuber and Mr. Parulekar, a blogger, of spreading false and defamatory content to malign its reputation. The court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar, P. S. Adalat has issued notices to both individuals and directed them to appear on September 20 according to release issued by Adani Group. The group has invoked Section 356 (1, 2 and 3) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, which are equivalent to the Indian Penal Code Section 499, 500 and 501 it said. The complaints point to a youTube video uploaded on August 18, 2025 by Sharma alleging that thousand of big has of land in Assam had been allotted to Adani and tying the company to a pattern of supposed political favours, as well as to a series of tweets and retweets by Parulekar since January 2025 making similar claims of land grabs, scams and undue benefits. The release said.

अदालत द्वारा जिस तरह का एक पक्षीय आदेश किया गया है वह अपने आप में चौंकाने वाला है। सवाल किया जा रहा है कि कोई भी अदालत इस तरह का पावर किसी को कैसे दे सकती है कि वह चुन चुन कर सोशल मीडिया से वीडियो को डिलीट करवाये। सवाल यह भी है कि लोकतंत्रात्मक गणराज्य में जब प्रधानमंत्री के कामों को लेकर आलोचनात्मक कमेंट किये जा सकते हैं और देश की सबसे बड़ी अदालत भी इसे लोकतंत्र के जिंदा रहने के तौर पर देखती है तो फिर गौतम अडाणी जैसे कारोबारी के अनैतिक लग रहे कारोबार को लेकर आलोचनात्मक टिप्पणी क्यों नहीं की जा सकती है ? अदालत दूसरे पक्ष की बात को सुने बिना इस तरह के आदेश क्यों कर कैसे दे सकती है? क्या गौतम अडाणी का रुतबा देश के सबसे बड़े कारोबारी होने के कारण राष्ट्रपति, प्रधानमंत्री से भी ऊपर हो गया है? क्या लोकतंत्र पर धनतंत्र हावी हो चुका है? इसी तरह से कारोबारी रुतवे से प्रभावित होने वाला दूसरा मामला है देश के सबसे बड़े सेठ मुकेश अंबानी के छोटे बेटे अनंत अंबानी द्वारा चलाए जा रहे वनतारा जू का । इस पर भी सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा दिये गये फैसले को लेकर सवाल उठने लगे हैं। सुप्रीम कोर्ट के आदेश में जो लिखा है वो वाकई चौंकाने वाला तो है ही वह यह भी बताता है कि देश की सबसे बड़ी अदालत भी बड़े-बड़े प्रभावशाली कारोबारियों को किस हद तक जाकर संरक्षित कर सकती है।

No further complaint of proceedings based upon such same set of allegations shall be entertained before any judicial statutory or administrative forum was to secure finality, obviate repetitive inquiries and investigation on issues concluded by the SIT.

We may leave it open to the respondent – vantara to pursue its remedies in accordance with law for the deletion of any offending publication or for any action against those responsible for the misinformation or for action for defamation or private complaints under the BNS, 2023 and if any such proceedings are initiated, they shall be dealt with on their own merits by the competent court/authority.

ये हैं वनतारा वाले मामले में सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा पारित किये गये आदेश के कुछ अंश। इस पर अंजली भारद्वाज ने लिखा है

Absolutely shocking and disappointing that the SIT headed by Justice Chelameswar submitted its report on Vantara in SEALED cover! This is the same Judge who refused to attend Supreme Court Collegium meeting because of lack of transparency. How the mighty have fallen!
The SIT was constituted by the court on August 25 to probe allegations of unlawful procurement of animals. Mistreatment in captivity and financial irregularities. Says Justice Chelameswar – As a Collegium member and the lone dissenting judge, his dissent is a historic as it is revealing of the Collegium’s opacity.

The SIT formed in the Anant Ambani owned Vantara has submitted a report in a sealed cover. The investigating part is the bench composition. Before that note that the order for the SIT came really quickly…… after just one hearing. Unusual given how the courts function and the billionaire it involves. Now the bench hearing the case is headed by Justice Pankaj Mithal and consists of Prasanna B Vavale. However as per the Roster of Judges published on in July 2025, the presiding Judge, Justice Mithal does not here “Environmental Laws” in his roster. However, the two petitions basis which the SIT order was passed were categorised ‘Environment Laws”. So why was it listed before Justice Mithal’s bench? As master of the Roster Chief Justice Gavai seems to have used his exclusive powers to’ Specially assign’ the case, as written in the Roster Document. The overall case of Vantara, with serveval High Court and Supreme Court orders intersecting to with each other, suggests something more is at play here.

Vantara Acquisition of Animals as per Regulation : Supreme Court Accept SIT Report – – The Supreme Court today (September 15) observed that the acquisition of animals in Vantara (Geens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre) run by the Reliance Foundation Jamnagar Gujrat is prima facie within the regulatory mechanisms. There was no foul play found by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the court to inquire in to various allegations. Including whether……….

Gautam Bhatia – –  Rubbing my eyes at these SC directions in the Vantara SIT case, especially (vi) – kept confidential but complete copy of the same be furnished to the respondent – Vantara, may be electronic copy of the same for its own use and record subject to an undertaking that it shall not be disclosed to third parties. The summary of the report which is exhaustive in it sat a sit does not carry comparable sensitiveness or attract the same degree of confidentiality but provides a faithful account of the conclusions reached by the SIT, shall not be treated as confidential.
Saurav Das… Executive – – Minded was one thing. What phrase can one coin for this? Alarming stuff happening in the supreme Court. Much like Loya judgement that closed all avenues of Criminal Cases in future, this too, has closed any such future possibility against Vantara and its affairs.

सुप्रीम कोर्ट का आदेश हो या लोवर कोर्ट का आदेश दोनों अफलातून की इस बात को साबित करने के लिए पर्याप्त हैं कि दुनिया का यह सबसे बड़ा झूठ है कि कानून सबके लिए बराबर है। कानून के जाल में तो केवल छोटी मछलियां फंसती हैं मगरमच्छ तो जाल फाड़ कर बाहर निकल आते हैं। मगर यहां तो कानून के कर्णधार खुद एक कदम आगे बढ़ कर मगरमच्छों को भविष्य में भी कानून के जाल में नहीं फंसने का इंतजाम करते हुए दिख रहे हैं। लोकतंत्र के तीन पाये तो बहुत पहले से ही नपुंसकता से ग्रसित दिख रहे थे। एक न्यायपालिका ही लोगों का आखिरी उम्मीद भरा आसरा होता है लेकिन जब वह भी जब इस तरह के आदेश पारित करता है तो कहीं न कहीं अदालतों पर से भरोसा डगमगाता है। वनतारा पर दिया गया आदेश सुप्रीम कोर्ट की नियत पर गंभीर सवाल तो खड़ा करता है? तो क्या देशवासियों को यह नारा लगाना चाहिए – – अमृत काल का एक ही नारा सेठ बचाओ धर्म हमारा। लोकतंत्र के चारों पाये बोलें सेठ बचाओ कार्य हमारा।

अश्वनी बडगैया अधिवक्ता
स्वतंत्र पत्रकार