By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Disclaimer.
Accept
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Opportunity
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Internships
    • Jobs
    • Events & Workshops
    • Moot Court
    • Call For Papers
  • Editorials
  • Case Analysis
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
  • Submit Blog
  • My Interests
Reading: DELHI HIGH COURT IMPOSES ₹25,000 COST ON SHAZIA ILMI IN DEFAMATION SUIT AGAINST RAJDEEP SARDESAI
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
Font ResizerAa
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Case Analysis
  • Subject Notes
    • LAW OF TORT
    • Constitution Law
    • CRIMINAL LAW
    • Family law
    • Contract Law
    • IPR
    • international law
    • Banking law
    • COMPANY LAW
    • CYBER LAW
    • Environmental law
  • Jobs
  • Opportunity
    • Internships
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Events & Workshops
  • Editorials
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Submit Blog Post
  • Customize Interests
Follow US
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Lawyer's Arc > Editorials > DELHI HIGH COURT IMPOSES ₹25,000 COST ON SHAZIA ILMI IN DEFAMATION SUIT AGAINST RAJDEEP SARDESAI
EditorialsNews

DELHI HIGH COURT IMPOSES ₹25,000 COST ON SHAZIA ILMI IN DEFAMATION SUIT AGAINST RAJDEEP SARDESAI

Last updated: 05/04/2025 9:56 PM
Yash Singhal
Published 05/04/2025
Share
5 Min Read
Photo Source: The Hindu
SHARE

The Delhi High Court on Friday imposed a cost of ₹25,000 on Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Shazia Ilmi for suppressing key facts in her ongoing defamation suit against senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai.

Contents
VIDEO TAKEDOWN UPHELD FOR PRIVACY VIOLATIONILMI’S CLAIMS OF MODESTY OUTRAGE AND VIDEO TAMPERING REJECTEDSARDESAI’S TWEET PARTIALLY JUSTIFIED, SAYS COURTTWEET NOT PROTECTED UNDER JOURNALISTIC CONDUCTBACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTELEGAL REPRESENTATION

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora passed the order while partly allowing Ilmi’s application for interim relief but noted that the BJP leader had intentionally withheld two tweets forming part of the same thread she had relied upon.

“Since the Plaintiff had wilfully suppressed two (2) tweets which formed part of the same conversation thread of which the Impugned Quote Tweet was part of and therefore, the Plaintiff is saddled with the cost of Rs. 25,000/- payable to Delhi High Court Bar Clerks’ Association, through the Secretary within a period of three (3) weeks,” the Court said.

-Story After Advertisement -

VIDEO TAKEDOWN UPHELD FOR PRIVACY VIOLATION

The Court confirmed an earlier interim order requiring the removal of an 18-second video clip, which depicted a confrontation between Ilmi and a video journalist after she exited a live debate on India Today.

“The contention of the Plaintiff that recording and publishing the impugned video (vis-à-vis 18 seconds after she withdrew from the live debate and moved out of the shooting frame) violates her right to privacy is duly made out in the facts of this case,” the Court held.

“The Plaintiff did not consent to the said recording… Therefore, the Defendants No.1 and 2 could not have recorded or used the said portion of the impugned video… The order dated 13.08.2024 directing removal of the impugned video is hereby confirmed till the disposal of the suit.”

-Story After Advertisement -

ILMI’S CLAIMS OF MODESTY OUTRAGE AND VIDEO TAMPERING REJECTED

Ilmi had alleged that her modesty was outraged by the journalist’s conduct and that the video was doctored — claims which were dismissed by the Court.

“The allegation of the Plaintiff with respect to the first 22 seconds of the impugned video stating that it outrages her modesty is an afterthought,” the Court noted.
“Firstly, the Plaintiff did not object to/raise the said grievance in the Suppressed Tweet No.1… Secondly, the video footage was telecasted on National Television contemporaneously on the date of the live debate.”

SARDESAI’S TWEET PARTIALLY JUSTIFIED, SAYS COURT

The Court analyzed Sardesai’s tweet, in which he stated that Ilmi had “chucked the mic” and “thrown the journalist out of her house”. It ruled that these specific phrases should be struck down, finding them unjustified.

-Story After Advertisement -

However, the remainder of the tweet, which said “abuse our journalist” and “no excuse for bad behaviour”, was allowed to stand as it appeared to have some prima facie basis.

TWEET NOT PROTECTED UNDER JOURNALISTIC CONDUCT

The Court emphasized that Sardesai’s tweet was not protected under the journalistic code, as it constituted a personal opinion rather than news reportage.

“This Court finds that the Impugned Quote Tweet of Defendant No. 1 would not be covered by the Norms of Journalistic Conduct… it was in the nature of a personal comment vis-à-vis the Plaintiff,” the order said.

-Story After Advertisement -

BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE

The matter dates back to July 26, 2024, during a televised debate on the Agnipath scheme, hosted by Sardesai on India Today. Ilmi clashed with retired Major General Yash Mor, and exited the debate after a heated exchange.

Later that evening, Ilmi tweeted:

“Remember I have been on both sides and know how to handle bullies like you. BTW it doesn’t behoove political propagandists masquerading as journalists to sermonize.”

-Story After Advertisement -

In response, Sardesai shared a video on X and wrote:

“If you have a grouse with me or with an army general on the show… that’s your prerogative. But for you to chuck the Mike and abuse our video journalist and throw him out of your house is just NOT done. He was only doing his job. No excuse for bad behavior.”

Ilmi subsequently moved the Court alleging privacy breach and defamation. In August 2024, the Court had already issued an order requiring the removal of the impugned video.

LEGAL REPRESENTATION

FOR SHAZIA ILMI: Advocates Natasha Garg and Thakur Ankit Singh

FOR RAJDEEP SARDESAI & INDIA TODAY: Senior Advocate Prashanto Sen with Hrishikesh Baruah, Anurag Mishra, Utkarsh Dwivedi, and Mashu Bishnoi

FOR OTHER RESPONDENTS: Advocates Varun Pathak, Yash Karunakaran, Tanuj Sharma, and Sauhard Alung


Related

You Might Also Like

SUPREME COURT STRUGGLES WITH JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR’S JUDGMENT, STAYS HIGH COURT ORDER ON NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT

India-Pakistan Tensions: Pakistan Breaches Ceasefire Again Despite Recent Agreement with India

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ORDERS PRESERVATION OF BYJU’S CIRP EMAIL RECORDS AMID CRIMINAL PROBE

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ORDERS DEPLOYMENT OF CENTRAL ARMED FORCES IN MURSHIDABAD AFTER WAQF ACT PROTEST TURNS VIOLENT

UP COP NAMES JUDGE AS ACCUSED IN THEFT CASE PROCLAMATION, COURT ORDERS PROBE

TAGGED:Delhi High Court

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.
[mc4wp_form]
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Share
What do you think?
Love0
Surprise0
Sad0
Happy0
Angry0
Dead0
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Updates Just a Click Away ! Follow Us

InstagramFollow
TelegramFollow
1.2kFollow
1.6kFollow

Join Telegram Channel

Join Whatsapp Channel

Lawyer's Arc Logo

Hey! Lawyer's Archian

One click. One opportunity closer to your legal hustle.
[mc4wp_form]
In Trend
LAW OF TORT

False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort

LA | Admin
LA | Admin
18/03/2024
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
- Advertisement -
Submit Post LAwyer's ArcSubmit Post LAwyer's Arc
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
Archives
False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort
18/03/2024
Lawyer's Arc Internship
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
23/04/2025
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
18/03/2024
Advocates Amendment Bill
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
22/02/2025
AIBE 19 RESULT DOWNLOAD
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
23/03/2025

You Might Also Like

EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT DIRECTS FSSAI TO SUBMIT REPORT ON FRONT-OF-PACKAGE WARNING LABELS WITHIN THREE MONTHS

Yash Singhal
Yash Singhal
13/04/2025
EditorialsNews

MADRAS HIGH COURT SLAMS DELAY IN COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT, ORDERS JOB FOR DECEASED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE’S WIDOW

Yash Singhal
Yash Singhal
13/04/2025
EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES PRESIDENT AND GOVERNOR’S POWERS OVER STATE BILLS IN LANDMARK VERDICT

Pankaj Pandey
Pankaj Pandey
12/04/2025
EditorialsNews

KERALA HIGH COURT GRANTS BAIL TO 91-YEAR-OLD MAN ACCUSED OF ATTACKING 88-YEAR-OLD WIFE OVER ALLEGED INFIDELITY

Pankaj Pandey
Pankaj Pandey
12/04/2025
Previous Next
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Hey Lawyer's Archian !
One click. One opportunity closer to your legal hustle.
[mc4wp_form]
Zero spam, Unsubscribe at any time.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?