New Delhi, February 27, 2026 – Nine women journalists from the independent media platform Newslaundry have declined to withdraw a ₹2 crore defamation suit filed against political commentator Abhijit Iyer Mitra in the Delhi High Court. The suit, originally filed in May 2025, alleges that Iyer Mitra made defamatory statements against the journalists on social media, including derogatory references to their workplace and personal character.
The plaintiffs, led by Newslaundry’s Managing Editor, claim that the remarks were malicious and false, causing reputational harm, mental trauma, and harassment. They are seeking a permanent injunction against further defamatory posts, a written apology, and monetary damages.
The court, presided over by Justice Vikas Mahajan, has now listed the matter before the Joint Registrar for further proceedings. The next hearing is scheduled for May 19, 2026.
Earlier, the Delhi High Court had directed Iyer Mitra to remove the allegedly offensive social media posts, noting that such language is “not permissible in a civilised society.” Iyer Mitra had previously sought dismissal of the suit, citing freedom of speech concerns.
This case highlights ongoing tensions between freedom of expression and protection against online defamation, particularly involving journalists and media commentators. Legal experts note that the proceedings could set an important precedent regarding social media conduct and reputational rights in India.
Description: Nine women journalists from Newslaundry have refused to withdraw a ₹2 crore defamation suit against political commentator Abhijit Iyer Mitra in the Delhi High Court. The suit, filed in May 2025, alleges that Iyer Mitra made defamatory remarks on social media, including derogatory references to the journalists and their workplace. The plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction, a written apology, and damages for reputational harm. The court, led by Justice Vikas Mahajan, has listed the matter before the Joint Registrar, with the next hearing on May 19, 2026. The case underscores the legal balance between freedom of speech and protection against online defamation, particularly for journalists, and may set an important precedent on social media conduct in India.