Delhi High Court judge recuses from hearing Wikipedia's appeal in ANI case

Justice Navin Chawla of the Delhi High Court on Monday recused from hearing an appeal moved by Wikimedia Foundation (Wikipedia) against a single-judge order directing it to take down the alleged defamatory statements made on its platform about news agency Asian News International (ANI) [Wikimedia Foundation Inc & Ors vs. ANI Media Pvt. Ltd.]..The matter was today listed before the Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Renu Bhatnagar. At the outset, Justice Chawla ordered that the matter be listed before another bench, subject to orders of the Chief Justice. .Pertinently, Justice Chawla, when he was holding a Single Bench last year, had initially heard ANI's suit against Wikipedia over the defamatory edits on its page,The page contained references to the news agency as a "propaganda tool" for the Central government.It was Justice Chawla who in July 2024 had issued summons to Wikipedia in the matter and ordered it to disclose information about three people who made the edits on ANI's Wikipedia page.After ANI complained that Wikipedia had not complied with this directive, Justice Chawla had taken strong objection to Wikipedia's conduct and issued a notice for contempt of court. Justice Chawla had also ordered an authorised representative of Wikipedia to be personally present in Court.These single-judge directives were then challenged by Wikipedia before the Division Bench where both ANI and Wikipedia reached an agreement.Under this agreement, Wikipedia agreed to serve notice on the users who made the edits, while protecting their identity. Wikipedia then served notices on the three users accused of making defamatory edits that tarnished ANI's reputation..ANI's suit was then heard by Justice Subramonium Prasad, who on April 2 passed an interim order to takedown the defamatory editsThe single-judge observed that Wikipedia cannot simply wash its hands off content uploaded on its platform by claiming that it is only an intermediary..Justice Prasad also found that the statements made on Wikipedia's page about ANI were contrary to the articles cited as sources. "After perusing the Articles which were being cited by Defendants No. 2 to 4 (those who made edits to the Wikipedia page on ANI) while making the impugned statements, this Court opines that the impugned statements on the Plaintiff's page are not verbatim reproduction of such articles, and these impugned statements are written in such a way which is totally contradictory to the intent with which these Articles were written and the impugned statements on the page pertaining to the Plaintiff on the Platform of Defendant No. 1 are devoid of the context of the Articles," the Court found. Thus, it had concluded that these statements were ex-facie defamatory and tarnished ANI's professional reputation. This order is now in appeal before Division Bench when Justice Chawla recused from the matter today.