Ravish Kumar v. Union Of India
$~174 & 175 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14562/2025, CM APPLs. 59789/2025, 59790/2025 (D/o)
(174) NEWSLAUNDRY MEDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Saurabh Kripal (Sr. Adv) along with Ms. Bani Dikshit, Mr. Uddhav Khanna, Mr. Dhruva Vig, Mr. Dhruv Chatrath, Mr. Junaid Amir, Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Mr. Ayush Kevlani, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:
Ms. Manisha Agrawal Narain (CGSC) along with Ms. Aditi Singh (GP) Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia (Sr. Adv) along with Mr. Naman Joshi, Mr. Ayush Jindal, Mr. Guneet Sidhu, Advs. for Intervenor/ Adani Enterprises Ltd.
+ W.P.(C) 14643/2025, CM APPL. 60037/2025
(175) RAVISH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Trideep Pais (Sr. Adv) along with Mr. Shantanu Derhgawen, Ms. Saloni Abastha, Ms. Sakshi Jain, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Amit Tiwari (CGSC) along with Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, Mr. Ayush Tanwar, Mr. Arpan Narwal, Advs.
Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia (Sr. Adv) along with Mr. Naman Joshi, Mr. Ayush Jindal, Mr. Guneet Sidhu, Advs. for Intervenor/ Adani Enterprises Ltd.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA % 26.09.2025
O R D E R
CM APPL. 62256/2025 in W.P.(C) 14562/2025 (Impleadment of R2) CM APPL. 62257/2025 in W.P.(C) 14643/2025 (Impleadment of R2) The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
1.
These are applications seeking impleadment of M/s. Adani Enterprises Ltd.
2.
The applications are not opposed.
3.
Considering the aforesaid and the averments made in the applications, the same are allowed. Let an amended memo of parties be filed by the petitioners within a period of one week from today. 4.
The applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 14562/2025 W.P.(C) 14643/2025 5.
The present petitions have been filed in the backdrop of the order dated 16.09.2025, issued by the respondent/ Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, whereby, intermediaries and content creators have been directed to comply with the ex-parte ad interim order dated 06.09.2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Rohini Courts, in CS SCJ 1066/2025 titled "Adani Enterprises Ltd. vs. Paranjoy Guha Thakurta & Ors."
6.
During the course of hearing, an understanding has been arrived at between the petitioners and M/s. Adani Enterprises Ltd, to the effect that the plaintiff in the aforementioned Civil Suit, will not precipitate matters and not seek removal of any material uploaded by the petitioners on their websites or other intermediaries, insofar as such material continues to be uploaded / depicted as of 12:00 P.M on 26.09.2025. It is also agreed that in case any material has already been taken down by the petitioners prior thereto, the same shall not be re-uploaded.
7.
It is further agreed that the aforesaid understanding shall subsist only The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
till the plaintiff's application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is decided and disposed of in the aforesaid Civil Suit. 8.
It is further submitted that the aforesaid understanding is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the Suit. 9.
The aforesaid understanding is taken on record. 10.
Learned counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that the impugned communication dated 16.09.2025 was predicated on its understanding as to its obligation/s under the statutory rules to apprise the concerned parties as to the order/s passed by the Civil Court in the Civil Suit No. CS SCJ 1066 of 2025.
11.
It is further pointed out that similarly, an order of the Appellate Court, whereby ad interim order dated 06.09.2025 was set aside qua certain parties, was duly communicated by the respondent to the concerned parties. 12.
Needless to say, the respondent / Union of India shall also similarly take note of the understanding recorded hereinabove, and issue a suitable corrigenda in terms thereof.
13.
The above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court as regards the merits of the respective case of the parties. It is further made clear that this Court has not pronounced / ruled upon the interpretation of the relevant statutory rules under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act).
14.
The present petitions are disposed of in the above terms. SEPTEMBER 26, 2025/uk/ss SACHIN DATTA, J The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.