The Delhi High Court Justice C Hari Shankar strongly objected the language used by Newslaundry journalist Manisha Pande in videos about TV Today Network
The Justice described certain remarks as “gross” and warned that they could have serious consequences.
A day later, the judge clarified that the remarks targeted the language used and were not intended to prejudice Pande’s career or gag the press.
On Thursday, January 22, 2026, the Delhi High Court strongly objected to the language used by Newslaundry journalist Manisha Pande concerning TV Today Network. In a video related to TV Today Network, which owns news channels like Aaj Tak and India Today, the Court warned that her remarks were far from journalistic standards and cautioned that they could have serious consequences.
The hearing was conducted by a Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla. As reported by Bar and Bench Justice C Hari Shankar said, “Are you continuing with anchor? She should be thrown out.” He made it clear that the journalist was unfit to continue as a reporter, stating that she lacked even the basic principles of reporting and the fundamentals of decency. It was stated that these observations would be made in open court and that the Court would not hesitate to comment on her conduct personally or implead her as a party if necessary. “There has to be a limit to everything,” the Court said, warning that such conduct could invite an order placing her entire career in disarray.
The observations were made during the hearing of appeals filed by the two organisations against a single judge’s order in a defamation, disparagement, and copyright infringement suit filed by TV Today Network against the online news platform Newslaundry. The Court firmly objected to the language used by Pande and described her use of the word “shit” while referring to a video about Good News Today as “gross” and disparaging.
In October 2021, TV Today Network filed a suit alleging that Newslaundry published videos and articles that tarnished its reputation and made “false, malicious and derogatory” statements about its channels, anchors, and management. The media group also alleged copyright infringement, arguing that Newslaundry used its video clips extensively beyond fair use.
In July 2022, a single judge denied interim relief to TV Today. Both parties appealed the order — TV Today challenging the denial of interim relief, and Newslaundry arguing that the court’s prima facie observations could harm it.
Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, representing Newslaundry, acknowledged that some language used in the videos could have been better but argued that the case was not about language but about journalistic critique. “I take their clip and comment on it. Yes, I should have used better language. But somebody wants to shut me down,” Rao said.
Advocate Hrishikesh Baruah, appearing for TV Today Network, argued that the comments made by Pande and Newslaundry’s Abhinandan Sekhri were deflating. On the other hand, Advocate Bani Dikshit, also appearing for Newslaundry, stated that the comments, including phrases such as “nanga nach (nude dance),” must be seen in the context in which they were used in the video.
While the Court objected to the use of the word “shit,” it clarified that not all criticism amounts to disparagement.
The Court said that not every word used amounts to disparagement and that the TV Today Group cannot term every video it dislikes as disparaging. It observed that phrases such as “method anchoring,” “thoda drama thoda gimmick (little drama, little gimmick),” “soap opera,” or “killing sports journalism Aaj Tak style” amounted to criticism, not disparagement.
“Every word that they say is not disparaging. This is commenting on what you are showing. This is criticism. How is this disparaging? She is saying that you are doing it for cheap thrills, that’s not disparaging... Even if he says your programme is absolute nonsense, that’s not disparaging, that’s a comment,” the Court observed.
Many people on social media responded to the case, discussing the media and its ethics. In a post, one person wrote, “Newslaundry journalist Manisha Pande, who laughs at her own jokes because nobody else does, is badly reprimanded by the court for her gutter-level journalistic ethics.” Another person questioned, “But will @newslaundry throw her out? Will they respect the judiciary and our courts?”
Bharatiya Liberal Party president and doctor Munish Kumar Raizada also slammed Newslaundry for its work. In a post on X, he said, “The whole rot stems from Newslaundry's founders. Abhinandan Sekhri was always licking Farziwal's boots to curry favors.”
On January 23, 2026, the Delhi High Court clarified that it had no intention of prejudicing journalist Manisha Pande’s career. Justice C Hari Shankar stated that the Court’s earlier strong remarks were directed at the language used and not meant to gag the press. He said the language could have been more dignified, acknowledged that the remarks were a “gut reaction,” and expressed concern over selective amplification of court comments on social media that led to hate messages.
“When we came across certain statements made by the journalist, which were, according to me, not in keeping with certain tenets of journalism, I made certain strong remarks... I am making it clear that I am not intending to act against the journalist or prejudice her career or any such thing. I think the counsel who were here were persons of maturity who understood the spirit in which those statements were made. I still feel that the language used by the journalist could have been more dignified, but that was what was intended to be conveyed,” Justice Hari Shankar said.
He added that several social media platforms amplified parts of his remarks, following which hate messages were sent. “If that is the consequence, what will happen ultimately is that we will stop interacting. It is because we expressed ourselves strongly that we got excellent responses... If we were to keep quiet, we would also not get that reaction from the Bar,” he said.
Suggested Reading: