The Delhi High Court has issued a stern warning to Wikipedia in a contempt case filed by ANI Media Private Limited. ANI accused Wikipedia of failing to comply with a previous court order requesting information about individuals who made defamatory edits to its Wikipedia page.
The media organisation claims that Wikipedia allowed edits on its page that labelled ANI as a "propaganda tool" for the government, which it views as damaging to its reputation.
On 5th September, Justice Navin Chawla of the Delhi High Court rejected Wikipedia's explanation that the delay in responding to the court’s summons was due to the fact that it is not based in India.
The court made it clear that this argument would not be accepted and warned that Wikipedia could face a ban in India if it does not comply with court orders.
Justice Chawla emphasised that failure to provide the requested information would not only lead to contempt charges but could also result in the government being asked to block access to Wikipedia in India.
The case stems from ANI’s claim that Wikipedia failed to identify the individuals responsible for the defamatory edits on the news agency’s page, despite a previous court directive.
Wikipedia had earlier appeared before the court on 20th August but had not provided the necessary information. ANI argued that Wikipedia had not contested the involvement of three individuals who were allegedly responsible for the edits and accused the platform of intentionally harming the news agency’s reputation.
The court has now directed that an authorised representative from Wikipedia must appear in person at the next hearing scheduled for 25th October. Wikipedia's defence, led by its legal team, attempted to argue that its delayed response was due to the platform’s international operations, but the court firmly rejected this reasoning. Justice Chawla pointed out that Wikipedia had previously used this argument, which had already been dismissed.
ANI is seeking Rs. 2 crores in damages from Wikipedia, along with the removal of defamatory content from its Wikipedia page. The media agency alleges that Wikipedia has damaged its goodwill and reputation by allowing the spread of false information.
ANI's lawsuit also questions Wikipedia's role in moderating and removing the controversial content, arguing that the platform’s actions have caused it to lose the legal protection it typically enjoys under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, which shields intermediaries from liability for user-generated content.
The court’s warning to Wikipedia highlights the legal challenges international digital platforms can face when they operate in countries with strict defamation and content regulations.
If Wikipedia fails to comply with the court's orders, it may not only face legal consequences but could also risk being blocked in India, a significant market for the platform.
Follow us
