Subodh Gupta

Select Language Afrikaans Albanian Arabic Armenian Azerbaijani Basque Belarusian Bulgarian Bengali Catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Filipino Finnish French Galician Georgian German Greek Gujarati Haitian Creole Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Irish Italian Japanese Javanese Kannada Khmer Korean Latvian Lithuanian Macedonian Malay Maltese Marathi Nepali Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swahili Swedish Tamil Telugu Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese Welsh Yiddish

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook community, Indpaedia.com. All information used will be gratefully acknowledged in your name.

2020

Gupta, Instagram accuser settle dispute

Abhinav Garg, February 11, 2020: The Times of India

The anonymous person behind an Instagram account that had levelled sexual harassment charges against artist Subodh Gupta told the Delhi high court that s/he was unconditionally withdrawing the defamatory content posted on the handle. The anonymous person also expressed regret.

Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw noted that the Instagram account holder, who has preferred to remain anonymous, removed the posts and told the court that the dispute with Gupta has been settled .

The HC then decreed the defamation suit in favour of the artist and against the holder of the Instagram account“@herdsceneand”, and ended the matter after Gupta’s counsel said he was agreeable to the suit decree and would not press for further removal or blocking of URLs relating to defamatory posts/ articles/ content, apart from those already under court orders.

The HC had earlier asked the account holder whether s/he wanted to represent the anonymous victim in the defamation suit filed by Gupta through advocate Neoma Vasdev.

The court also shot down attempts by the Indian Journalists Union (IJU) to oppose the settlement and questioned its locus. When IJU claimed a decree in favour of Gupta would affect the rights of journalists to write or report the matter, the HC demanded the names of the journalists who want to write or whose rights are affected, but the IJU didn’t give any.

“Once the defendant from whose handle the story emanated has made the statement and expressed regret for the same. IJU can’t claim any right to interfere in the compromise arrived at between the two parties,” Justice Endlaw observed.

For its part, Google, which was also dragged to court by Gupta, said the HC’s earlier directions have been adhered to and it had removed the URLs carrying the defamatory content, but the articles were still available on the host websites of certain media houses and other search engines.