The Delhi High Court Thursday said it would go through the news articles that form basis of the alleged defamatory edits made about Asian News International (ANI) on its Wikipedia page [ANI Media Private Limited vs. Wikimedia Foundation Inc & Ors]..Justice Subramonium Prasad was referring to the articles published by The Caravan and The Ken on ANI's functioning as a news organization. "I will also read the articles ... to see whether the (edits) are borne out of the articles or not. Obviously, if they are not borne out of the articles, they cannot do it. Therefore, I can, to that extent, even ask them to take down those offending statements," the Court said.The Court added that if it finds that such inference, as made in the edits, can be drawn from the articles, then it may not pass a takedown order.However, it also wondered whether it can go into such detail at the interim stage."This is an understanding of the editor of what the source means. If the understanding is so defamatory that it is relying on something which actually does not mean it at all, then the person can be restrained... again the question is even if it can be understood in that way, then would the court go deeper into that aspect to come to a conclusion as to whether in no circumstances can it be construed it as that at all," the single-judge said..Pertinently, The Caravan and The Ken are not party to ANI's defamation suit before the High Court The defamation suit was filed alleging that Wikipedia was allowing defamatory edits to its page on the online encyclopedia.The Court also said it would later examine whether Wikipedia is only an intermediary or a publisher to whom different rules will apply. At this stage, the Court said, it would only see whether the content on ANI's Wikipedia page breaches the free speech restrictions put under Article 19 1(a) of the Constitution of India."The courts in case of 19 1(a) of have said that injunction must be exception and not the rule. Keeping that in mind, I have to then look into the question of irreparable loss, prima facie case and balance of connivence," it explained. .The single-judge made these remarks while reserving decision on ANI's application for interim relief. Meanwhile, the Court also questioned Wikipedia for attempting to defend the actions of the users, who are accused of making defamatory edits on ANI's page."I have to defend my model of free speech. I am not on merits of allegations," Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta, representing Wikipedia, said in response.Advocate Sidhant Kumar represented ANI..In July, the Court in the suit had issued a summons to Wikipedia 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, single-judge Justice Navin Chawla took strong objection to Wikipedia's conduct and issued a notice for contempt of court.The single-judge had also ordered an authorised representative of Wikipedia to be personally present in Court on October 25, when the contempt case was listed next.These single-judge directives were challenged by Wikipedia before the Division Bench where both ANI and Wikipedia reached an agreement and the latter agreed to serve notice on the users thereby protecting their identity.Wikipedia then served notices on the three users accused of defamation by ANI.
