The Supreme Court on Monday reignited the debate over India’s colonial-era criminal defamation laws, observing that the time had come to consider their decriminalisation while hearing pleas filed by news portal The Wire.
A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma issued notice on petitions filed by The Wire, its Deputy Editor Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprastha, and the Foundation for Independent Journalism, challenging fresh summons in a defamation case filed by former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) professor Amita Singh.
During the proceedings, Justice Sundresh orally remarked, “I think the time has come to decriminalise all this,” signalling the Court’s growing unease with continuing criminal sanctions for defamation in a modern democracy.
The controversy stems from a 2016 article in The Wire titled “Dossier Calls JNU ‘Den of Organized Sex Racket’; Students, Professors Allege Hate Campaign”. The article, authored by Mahaprastha, reported on a dossier circulated on campus, which Singh alleged falsely implicated her as its author and accused her of instigating hostility against students and faculty.
According to the complaint, the publication defamed Singh by failing to verify the authenticity of the dossier and by exploiting it for commercial gain.
The legal dispute has travelled across multiple courts over nearly a decade.
- In 2017, a Delhi metropolitan court summoned The Wire’s Siddharth Bhatia and Mahaprastha.
- That order was quashed by the Delhi High Court in 2023, but the Supreme Court reversed the decision in 2024 and sent the matter back for reconsideration.
- In May 2025, the Delhi High Court upheld a second round of summons, now under challenge before the apex court.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for The Wire and its trust, argued that the repeated summons were unwarranted. The bench has now sought responses, keeping alive both the case against The Wire and the broader question of whether criminal defamation has a place in Indian law.
The Supreme Court’s observation adds fresh momentum to the longstanding debate on criminal defamation, which critics say stifles free speech and press freedom, while supporters argue it remains necessary to protect individual reputation.
