In a significant development on Thursday, AltNews co-founder Mohammed Zubair deleted a tweet in which he had shared a controversial video by YouTuber Mohak Mangal, following a defamation case filed by the news agency ANI in the Delhi High Court. The legal suit, while specifically targeting Mangal, also named Mohammed Zubair and comedian Kunal Kamra for amplifying the video in question. The case revolves around a video posted by Mohak Mangal that ANI alleged was defamatory in nature. As the video gained traction on social media, Zubair and Kamra were among those who shared it with their respective audiences, prompting ANI to take legal action against all three. During the hearing, Zubair’s legal counsel informed the court that his client was willing to delete the tweet containing the disputed video. Appealing for his name to be removed from the case, Zubair stated, “I have only made one tweet. I am not a YouTuber. I am not making money out of this. This is the most civilized. I am willing to delete it down.” The court acknowledged Zubair’s cooperation and noted that ANI did not object to the withdrawal of his name from the suit. As a result, the court instructed that the tweet be deleted within 24 hours — a step already taken by Zubair even before the official directive.
The court’s leniency towards Zubair contrasts sharply with its response to Kunal Kamra’s stance. Kamra, known for his satirical and politically charged posts, declined to take down his tweets. The court took note of the language used by Kamra, particularly terms like “thugs” and “mafia” directed at ANI, and found them unacceptable. “I don’t see satire, humour there,” remarked the judge during the hearing, stressing that such expressions cross the line from critique into defamation. Consequently, the court issued an oral order directing Kamra to delete his initial tweet in which he used derogatory language against the news agency. As of now, Kamra has not complied with the order, and it remains to be seen whether he will face further legal consequences for defying the court’s directive. The incident highlights the increasing legal scrutiny over content shared on social media, especially in relation to journalistic entities and public figures. It also raises broader questions around free speech, satire, and the limits of digital commentary in India’s evolving legal landscape.
