Hotmail co-founder Sabeer Bhatia faces ₹50 crore defamation suit against Adani over documentary on Modi: What’s going on? | Today’s news

Hotmail co-founder Sabeer Bhatia faces a ₹Adani Enterprises has filed a Rs 50 crore defamation suit over a documentary examining the relationship between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and billionaire Gautam Adani.

The Calcutta High Court has ordered social media platforms including YouTube, X and Meta-owned Instagram to remove the 36-minute documentary titled The Friendship Files: How Modi and Adani Stole India and specified reproductions thereof. The court also barred Bhatia from circulating the video, the Bar and Bench said.

The interim injunction issued by Justice Aryak Dutt will remain in force till January 31, 2027 or until further orders. The case is expected to be heard again in January.

Adani Enterprises alleged that the document contains false and defamatory statements and omits material facts. The company said in court that the content raised questions from some investors.

Bhatia, who is based in the US, contested the case against him. In a post on X, he said the lawsuit is being pursued ₹50 crore in compensation and claimed that the documentary struck a nerve.

Read also | Watch: Piyush Goyal addresses trade differences between India and China

Why is Adani Enterprises suing Sabeer Bhatia?

The dispute centers on the documentary The Friendship Files, which Bhatia recorded on October 9 in collaboration with a channel called Shadow Citizens. The film uses archival footage to trace the relationship between Modi and Adani, both hailing from Gujarat.

It also raises questions about Adani’s successful bid for six airports in 2019 following a change in government rules. Critics alleged that the change favored the Adani Group, an allegation similar to those leveled by the opposition Congress party.

Adani Group denied such allegations. The government claims that all regulations were followed and that there was no favoritism.

In its legal challenge, Adani Enterprises alleged that the document made false allegations and created a narrative against the company by suppressing material facts. It also said its action was not intended to prevent legitimate criticism of government policy or business concentration.

Read also | ‘Silencing the truth’: Sabeer Bhatia reacts as YouTube blocks his film in India

According to the court order, the company argued that the allegations damaged its reputation and that continued distribution of the video could cause further damage.

What did the Calcutta High Court say about the document?

The court described the film as a dramatized story rather than a news report or description of a court proceeding.

“The impugned video is not a news report or a description of proceedings,” the court said, according to Bar and Bench.

Justice Aryak Dutt observed that the allegations suggesting that the Adani group was involved in, or was not responsible for, the smuggling of narcotics linked to the financing of terrorism or police violence against the farmer had not been substantiated by any authority.

The court also noted that the original video had already been banned but was subsequently re-uploaded by Bhatia. She said that prima facie indicated a lack of good faith.

Read also | Dubai announces world’s first 24-karat gold sidewalk for 2026

The court ordered the removal of said video, clips, excerpts and materially identical reproductions from the respective accounts and platforms. It also ordered social media platforms to disable access to identified content and maintain relevant account and access records.

However, the court clarified that its order does not prevent constructive criticism or fair reporting of the Adani Group or government policy, provided it is not disseminated through the impugned video, its reproductions or specified defamatory statements.

“Constructive criticism or truthful reporting of the petitioner or government policy supported by evidence is not prohibited. Online content spreads rapidly through reposts and re-uploads, and reputational damage from continued publication cannot be adequately compensated in money. If the order is not passed now, its purpose will be defeated by further dissemination before the objectors can be heard (Bhatia et al).

The order is temporary in nature. The court’s comments at this stage do not constitute a final decision on the defamation allegations.

What Sabeer Bhatia said about ₹A trial for 50 million?

Bhatia responded to the legal action through posts on X, challenging the compensation sought by Adani Enterprises.

On Tuesday, he wrote: “Adani is suing me ₹50 crore, apparently valuing the damage to his reputation at that amount. I argue that wealth acquired through alleged wrongdoing does not bring credibility or reputation. My appreciation of that reputation? ₹0. And if the reputational damage is zero, the compensation should be zero. ₹50 million requested. ₹0 deserved.”

Adani is suing me ₹50 crore, apparently valuing the damage to his reputation at that amount.

I argue that wealth acquired through alleged wrongdoing does not bring credibility or reputation.

My appreciation of that reputation? ₹0.

And if the reputational damage is zero, the compensation should be zero.

₹50 million requested. ₹0 deserved.

— Sabeer Bhatia (@sabeer) October 27, 2026

In an earlier post, Bhatia wrote, “Truth is on my side”.

He also said, “I believe the document has shaken Adani Enterprises Limited and struck a nerve at the highest levels,” he wrote.

The company has since argued that the film contains false allegations and that its legal action is aimed at the content at issue rather than legitimate criticism of its business or government policies.

What made the Modi-Adani documentary garner attention?

The document circulated across social media platforms and was shared by Modi’s political opponents, who said it reflected allegations they had made earlier about the relationship between the prime minister and the industrialist, Reuters reported.

Maharashtra politician Raj Thackeray had earlier shared the film on his X account, where it received 4.8 million views, according to a Reuters report. He subsequently removed it, saying that he had done so at the request of the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai.

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra also shared the document on October 11. “I posted this on October 11th. It’s still on my timeline so check it out,” she wrote on X Monday night.

Ahead of the defamation suit, the Maharashtra police issued Bhatia a takedown notice on October 19, saying the content “made serious baseless allegations”.

What happens next in the Adani-Bhatia case?

The interim order requires the said content to be removed from the relevant platforms and prevents its further dissemination by the respondents. The matter is expected to return to court on January 31, 2027 or as directed by the court.

The case will examine the allegations made by Adani Enterprises and the defendants’ responses. A preliminary ruling does not constitute a final decision on the merits of the defamation action.

The court also made clear that its directions did not amount to a blanket ban on constructive criticism of the Adani Group or government policy or honest, evidence-based reporting.