Abhijit Iyer agrees to remove tweets on Newslaundry after Delhi high court rap

Hindustan Times

21-05-2025

New Delhi: Delhi-based defence analyst Abhijit Iyer Mitra on Wednesday undertook before the Delhi high court to take down allegedly sexually abusive social media posts against digital news platform Newslaundry and its employees within five hours, after the court slammed him for his language saying that the 'choice of words' are 'impermissible in (a) civilized society.'
'What you want? This kind of language! Whatever maybe the background... you may justify the background... but can this kind of language (be used) against women in (a) civilised society? Please immediately take it down,' said justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav while hearing a petition filed by nine women employees of Newslaundry against Mitra over his allegedly sexually abusive social media posts.
As Iyer's lawyer conceded the choice of words could have been avoided, the court said, 'We will not hear you unless you take down these. The choice of words is impermissible in (a) civilised society and (a) person who chooses this kind of language should not be heard unless he takes down. You take down today, then we'll hear you. We may direct for registration of FIR suo moto, if eventually you fail to satisfy us….'
Mitra's lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai undertook to remove the posts.
The suit stemmed from a series of tweets posted by Mitra from February to April.
In the suit, seeking ₹2 crore as damages and an unconditional apology, the women employees including the platform's managing editor Manisha Pande alleged that Mitra through a series of posts falsely and maliciously labelled them using derogatory terms and slurs, posted obscene poems undermining their dignity and also launched a scathing attack against the platform's subscribers.
'Even a bare perusal for the allegations and insinuations, which have been tabulated in the plaint in detail, leave not an iota of doubt that these are capable of causing inordinate corrosion of the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiffs that has been arduously built over a period of years. Furthermore, the libelous and unsubstantiated allegations by the Defendant No.1 will not only directly and adversely affect the reputation of the Plaintiffs amongst their friends, family and peers, but has caused enormous mental trauma, harassment and embarrassment,' the suit argued by advocate Bani Dikshit and Uddhav Khanna stated.
During the hearing, Mitra's lawyer submitted that the posts were not attributable to the woman journalists and he on earlier occasions had also put out tweets questioning their source of income. 'Not for a moment can I condone or defend the choice of language, but this is half the story. They (Newslaundry) are not a news organisation as they claim to be a holy news organisation. I'm a geo-political expert and I have put out tweets about the source of income. The remark made please have that for a moment. It's in the context of organisation referred to as a brothel. Because they take this finding from questionable sources,' Dehadrai said.
However, justice Kaurav said, 'If you want that finding, then let me say, these are directly attributable to the plaintiff. Does he (Mitra) understand the definition of brothel… can some who take income from questionable sources can it be called a brothel? You may have multiple grievances but choice of words is impermissible in a civilised society.'
He further submitted that the journalists, besides filing a suit, 'hypothetically', also had the right to initiate criminal proceedings in case they found the tweets abusive. However, the court at this juncture warned of issuing directions for registration of FIR saying, 'In that case, we as a constitutional court will suo moto direct registration of criminal FIR against the defendant. Don't try to be over smart. You are trying to be over smart with the court. For each observation, the court is about to make you interject repeatedly. We may direct for registration of FIR, suo moto if eventually you fail to satisfy us.'
Ultimately, Mitra undertook to take down the tweets within five hours.
Justice Kaurav said, 'Mr Jai contends that without prejudice to the rights and contention, the defendant would remove the tweet within 5 hours. The aforesaid statement is taken on record, and the aforesaid arrangement is made and the same is without prejudice to his rights and contention. Let the matter be taken during the course of next week.' The matter will now be heard on May 26.
The suit went on to add that use of the term prostitute was not only an insult and an attack on the woman journalists but also reinforced deeply regressive and violent attitudes toward sex workers, who face systemic marginalisation and stigma. 'No woman/ person deserves to be dehumanised. No profession deserves to be weaponized as an insult. These remarks strip women—whether journalists or sex workers—of agency, identity, and respect,' it added.
Seeking takedown of the tweets, the suit states that the publications do not fall within the purview of 'free speech' 'journalistic criticism' 'satire' or fair comments and were rather sexist slur aimed at humiliating the women professionals of Newslaundry. 'They directly attack their dignity and right to work without fear or sexual harassment, apart from an attack on the Plaintiff No. 10 organisation (Newslaundry),' it added.