Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has issued takedown notices to several journalists, media houses, and creators, including Ravish Kumar, Dhruv Rathee, Newslaundry, The Wire, HW News and Aakash Banerjee’s The Deshbhakt. The directive cites a Delhi court’s gag order in a defamation case filed by Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).
The notice lists 138 YouTube links and 83 Instagram posts, of which Newslaundry has been asked to remove 42 videos from its YouTube channel. The ministry has claimed that the court order was issued on September 6, and that the links were not removed by the media organisations despite the court order.
The flagged material is not limited to investigative stories but also covers satire and incidental mentions.
For instance, an NL subscription appeal video was flagged simply because it featured a screenshot of an Adani story. An interview with comedian Kunal Kamra — where he joked about censorship — also made it to the list. “If I post that Adani is our coal minister — that’s satire in my book. But under this regime, the government can say it’s false and strike it down,” Kamra had said.
Episodes of TV Newsance, along with an explainer on how the cases against NDTV's former owners Prannoy and Radhika Roy were closed after the Adani takeover of the channel also featured on the list. Reports on the Dharavi project and episodes of Newslaundry’s weekly podcast NL Hafta, 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 Janata Party was discussed.It also includes three videos done by The News Minute, including one episode each of South Central and Let Me Explain, which were hosted on the Newslaundry Youtube channel.
The MIB letter, dated September 16, 2025, said that publishers had failed to act within the stipulated time. “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 stated.
Copies of the notice were also marked to Meta Platforms Inc. and Google Inc., placing responsibility on intermediaries to act under the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
The Ministry’s directive stems from a September 6, 2025, ex-parte interim injunction passed by Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh of the Rohini Courts. The court had ordered to “expunge defamatory material from their respective articles/social media posts/tweets and if the same is not feasible, remove the same within 5 days”. The order barred journalists Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, Ayush Joshi and several others from publishing any material deemed defamatory against Gautam Adani’s company, Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL).
“This is a civil suit in which the court issued instructions to intermediaries. The intermediaries have to act on court takedown notices, why is the government getting involved? Meanwhile, the defendants have filed an appeal against the order which they have a right to do. The court knows how to implement their own orders they don’t need the Ministry to do that for them. The Ministry is preempting the judicial process,” senior advocate Indira Jaising said.
An ex-parte ad interim injunction is a temporary court order issued without hearing the other side, usually in urgent situations where swift action is needed to prevent serious or irreparable harm.
In its plaint, Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) had alleged that Paranjoy Guha Thakurta through his website paranjoy.in, along with portals like adaniwatch.org and adanifiles.com.au, published repeated reports critical of the group’s projects and its founder Gautam Adani.
Paranjoy responded saying he will challenge the order. “I stand by my reporting which is verified, factual, fair, balanced, unbiased, and conducted without fear or favour. I have full faith in the judiciary of India and remain confident that all the articles that I have authored or co-authored and all the statements that I have made are not just truthful and accurate but always in the public interest.”
He also noted that this was the seventh defamation case filed against him by Adani group of companies from 2017 onwards.
Adani, represented by senior advocate Jagdeep Sharma, argued that repeated publication of “baseless and malicious” reports had damaged its brand equity, delayed projects, and strained investor confidence. The plaint cited repeated references to the 2023 Hindenburg Research report, which alleged financial irregularities, as part of the campaign that harmed the group’s reputation. The court agreed that unverified reports could “wipe off billions worth of investor’s money, create panic in the market, [and cause] loss of goodwill and reputation of plaintiffs at a global scale.”
The order, however, had also observed that fair reporting remains protected. “This order shall not be construed to restrain any person from reporting about investigation and court proceedings in relation to the allegations so long as it is fair and accurate reporting based on substantiated and verified material.”