The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that if a court wants to take down a report about the proceedings in a case, it must prima facie record a finding that the publication is contemptuous..The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a plea moved by the Wikimedia Foundation (Wikipedia) against the Delhi High Court order for take down of a page on Wikipedia about the 'Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation' case.The Supreme Court remarked that a takedown of a report about the High Court proceedings cannot be ordered just because the High Court judges do not like it."Suppose somebody says something about proceedings before this Court. Only on the ground that we don't like it we cannot direct removal. Only if we are satisfied the well settled place of contempt, we can direct. If we see that it is contemptuous, we can do it. But only because we don't like it, we cannot order removal," the apex court said..The Court had earlier also criticized the Delhi High Court for ordering takedown of the page. Today, it reserved its decision on Wikipedia's plea.While doing so, the Court said,"Prima facie what we feel is ... We are not saying that court is powerless to direct that some content should be removed. But there first has to be a prima facie finding recorded with reasons that what is published is contemptuous. Then court can have power to direct removal.".The page in question, which has already been taken down, contained details about the defamation case filed by ANI against Wikipedia in Delhi High Court. It contained details about the hearing in the High Court and the remarks made by the High Court during the hearing of ANI's defamation suit.The High Court had taken objection to the same and had even said in its order that discussion about the observations made by the Court would amount to contempt of court. In view of the same, it had in October 2024 ordered the online encyclopedia to take down the page.Today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Wikipedia, submitted that the page contained details about the case proceedings as reported by media."All live proceedings were already reported by Live Law. It's not as if we picked up something on our own. Even Indian Express has done it. They were not proceeded against," Sibal said.He also argued that a court cannot say there can be no discussion. "We have an open justice system. This has a chilling effect," he added..The Court agreed with Sibal. "If somebody publishes a news item about me and my brother (referring to Justice Bhuyan) that we threatened somebody in Court, we will not get bothered. But if somebody puts something in the mouth of the judge, that concern is there. It all depends. We will not be bothered by this. In open court, everyday we are told things... Why should be bothered about these things," Justice Oka said..Meanwhile, Advocate Sidhant Kumar, who represented the ANI, also submitted,"We have taken instructions. Judicial proceedings should be open to the public.".The issue arose after ANI sued Wikimedia Foundation for defamation alleging that the platform allowed defamatory edits on the Wikipedia page about ANI. The page contained references to the news agency as a "propaganda tool" for the present Central government.The High Court issued summons to Wikipedia on July 9, 2024 and ordered it to disclose information about three people who made the edits on ANI's Wikipedia page.ANI later filed a contempt of court application before a single-judge of the High Court alleging that the order was not complied with.Wikipedia's counsel told the Court that it has to make certain submissions regarding the order and that it took them time to appear because Wikipedia is not based in India.However, Justice Navin Chawla on September 5 took strong objection to Wikipedia's conduct and ordered an authorised representative of Wikipedia to be personally present in Court on October 25.Wikipedia then moved the division bench in appeal. However, when the matter came up before the division bench, it noted that a page had been created on the case itself. The High Court then took strong objection to Wikipedia allowing the page titled 'Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation' to be published in relation to case. Eventually, the bench of Chief Justice Manmohan (who has since been elevated to the apex court) and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ordered Wikipedia to take down the page on ANI's case. This led to the present appeal before the top court..Pertinently, the High Court on April 2 passed an interim order directing Wikipedia to take down the alleged defamatory statements made on another Wikipedia page about ANI..[Read Order]
