The Supreme Court today, reversed court orders that directed Bloomberg to remove an article alleging accounting irregularities within Zee Entertainment's financial records. The decision, delivered by a bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud alongside Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, highlights dissatisfaction with prior rulings from both the Delhi High Court and a lower trial court.

The crux of the matter lies in a report published by Bloomberg on February 21, which asserted the discovery of a $241 million accounting anomaly within Zee Entertainment's books. This publication prompted Zee Entertainment to file a defamation suit against Bloomberg and its journalists, Anto Antony, Saikat Das, and Preeti Singh, in a Delhi district court.

Responding to Zee Entertainment's claims, the trial court swiftly issued an interim injunction, compelling Bloomberg to remove the contentious article from circulation. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Delhi High Court on March 14, directing Bloomberg to comply with the takedown directive within three days.

However, the Supreme Court's recent ruling underscores a critical oversight in the application of legal principles by both the trial court and the High Court. The Court emphasized the necessity for a thorough examination of the facts to determine whether the criteria for granting an injunction were met. Specifically, it stressed the three-fold test, which evaluates the existence of a prima facie case, the balance of convenience, and the risk of irreparable legal harm.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohtagi, representing Bloomberg, argued vehemently against the High Court's decision, asserting that it infringed upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Rohtagi contended that the injunction order rendered Bloomberg defenseless in a matter of significant public interest.

In response to queries from the Bench, Zee Entertainment's counsel maintained that the Bloomberg article was inherently defamatory and false. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court reiterated the necessity for reasoned judgments, cautioning against mere recitation of legal standards without substantive analysis.

Consequently, the Supreme Court annulled both the trial court's interim injunction and the Delhi High Court's affirmation thereof. The matter has been remanded to the trial court for reconsideration, emphasizing the need for a meticulous evaluation of the three-fold test before granting any injunction against Bloomberg.

Case: Bloomberg Television Production Services India Private Limited and Ors vs. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited.