The Supreme Court on Friday questioned the Delhi High Court’s order to Wikimedia Foundation, which runs the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, to remove a page about the ongoing proceedings in a defamation suit filed by Asian News International, Bar and Bench reported.

On October 16, a High Court bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Wikimedia Foundation to take down a page about ongoing proceedings of a 2 crore defamation suit filed by the news agency against the platform. The non-profit has since “suspended access” to the page.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, however, on Friday asked how the High Court could have passed such a direction unless it came to a conclusion that the page constituted contempt of court.

“Everyday in media we find severe criticism of the Court,” the Supreme Court said. “Unless it is contempt, how can the Court be so touchy? In a lighter vein, this criticism is nothing. Why is the Court being so touchy? Such criticism will be read and forgotten in a few days.”

The main defamation suit is about a page about ANI that says that the news agency has been criticised for serving as a “propaganda tool” for the current Union government.

ANI, in its suit, alleged that Wikimedia Foundation published false and defamatory content with malicious intent to tarnish the news agency’s reputation, according to Live Law.

The Supreme Court has posted the matter for further hearing on April 9, Live Law reported.

Delhi HC cites ‘neutrality’ concerns

On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court ordered Wikimedia Foundation to remove allegedly defamatory content about ANI, saying that it was written based on “editorials and opinionated pages”.

The High Court also said that Wikipedia can not evade responsibility for content on its platform by claiming to be just an intermediary.

“[Wikipedia] cannot completely wash its hands of the contents of the article on the ground that it is only an intermediary and cannot be held responsible for the statement that is published on its platform,” the court said in its judgement.

It highlighted that the platform carries carries “higher” responsibility because it “professes itself to be an encyclopedia and people at large have a tendency to accept the statements made on [it] as gospel truth”.

Also read: A Delhi High Court case could end up threatening how Wikipedia works in India