The Wikimedia Foundation, the United States-based non-profit that runs Wikipedia, has “suspended access” to a page on the online encyclopaedia about a defamation case filed against it by Asian News International.

This came after the Delhi High Court on Wednesday ordered Wikipedia to take down the webpage, titled Asian News International vs Wikimedia Foundation.

Wikipedia is a free online collaborative encyclopaedia edited by volunteers.

The High Court has been hearing a defamation case filed by ANI seeking removal of the description on another Wikipedia page about the news agency. The page about ANI says that the news agency has been criticised for serving as a “propaganda tool” for the current Union government.

The court has also asked Wikipedia to identify the editors of the page about ANI, which the platform has refused to do.

After the case started, another page appeared on Wikipedia discussing the proceedings in the legal matter. The division bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela had observed on Wednesday that the comments made on this page against the court’s single-judge bench were prima facie contemptuous.

After Wikipedia suspended access to the page about the proceedings of the case, the High Court dismissed the news agency’s contempt plea against the platform.

The defamation proceedings will be heard again on October 29.

Wikipedia’s lawyers concluded their arguments on Monday as to why the identities of the users who have made edits to the ANI’s page should not be revealed.

On October 14, the High Court said it was “extremely disturbing” that Wikipedia thinks it is beyond the ambit of law.

The court’s remark came in response to Wikipedia’s refusal to identify the editors of the page. “The system [of Wikipedia] cannot be a cloak to defame someone,” the court said.

On Monday, the Manmohan remarked, according to Bar and Bench: “I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government.”

Advocate Sidhant Kumar, appearing for ANI, said that any information disclosed by Wikipedia about the identity of its page’s editors would only be used to serve summonses.

“I will not disclose it to any third party as far as information of defendants is concerned,” Kumar said. “I am not interested in either vilifying or in any manner causing any harm, except to pursue my remedy.”

Lawyer Akhil Sibal, representing Wikipedia, invoked several judgements to argue against the disclosure, according to Bar and Bench, saying that it would set a precedent for his client “to take on the responsibility of service every time”.

In response, the court suggested that the counsels for both parties could adhere to a confidentiality agreement, in case Wikipedia feared reprisals against its users.

Also read: Why Delhi HC is angry with Wikipedia for calling ANI a ‘government propaganda tool’