The Delhi High Court on Monday issued summons to political commentator Abhijit Iyer Mitra in a civil defamation suit filed by nine women journalists from digital news platform Newslaundry, who have accused him of making derogatory and malicious remarks against them on social media.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, while hearing the suit, directed Mitra to file his written response and also issued notice to social media platform X (formerly Twitter), seeking its stand on the matter.
The plaintiffs have alleged that Mitra used “derogatory terms and slurs” to make “false, malicious, and unsubstantiated allegations” against them through a series of now-deleted posts on X. Despite the deletion of the content after the court’s previous oral directions, the journalists are seeking a permanent injunction, a written public apology, and ₹2 crore in damages.
“Having considered the nature of the submissions by the plaintiff, the court deems it appropriate to direct issuance of summons to the defendants,” the order stated.
While the court refrained from passing any interim injunction at this stage, it issued a caution to Mitra, stating, “We are not restraining you, but where the ‘Laxman Rekha’ lies, you must understand. So long as you continue to use your right to speech… when it becomes defamatory, the plaintiff will be at liberty to come back to court.”
Advocates Bani Dikshit and Farman Ali, representing the women journalists, submitted that Mitra had shown “no remorse” for his remarks. They argued that the deleted posts were part of a larger pattern of targeted online abuse aimed at discrediting their professional work.
Senior advocate Percival Billimoria, appearing for Mitra, argued that the content in question was not defamatory and had already been taken down in compliance with the court’s earlier observations. He urged dismissal of the suit, claiming that the posts fell within the bounds of free speech and were not malicious in nature. He further sought a probe against what he termed the “most insidious” media platform involved in the matter, a request the court declined, noting that “the remedy lies elsewhere.”
The court clarified that its earlier direction for removal of the posts would remain in force and asked the plaintiffs to approach the court again if any similar content was posted in the future.
The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for September.
