The Delhi High Court has refused to grant relief to YSR Congress Party leader and former Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams chairperson Yerram Venkata Subba Reddy in a defamation suit seeking an ex-parte interim injunction against media reportage on the alleged adulteration of Tirupati laddu prasadam.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Amit Bansal recently held that the threshold for restraining publication without hearing the defendants had not been met. It underscored the settled principle that prior restraint on speech, particularly against media entities, is permissible only in exceptional and narrowly circumscribed circumstances.
At the prima facie stage, the High Court found it appropriate to afford the defendants an opportunity to place their defence on record before any interim relief could be contemplated. The suit, instituted by Reddy and his wife, alleges that various media publications carried defamatory imputations linking them to irregularities in the procurement of ghee used for the preparation of prasadam at the Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Tirumala.
Reddy served as Chairman of the Board of the Committee of Management of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams between June 2019 and August 2023, a period during which the procurement decisions in question were allegedly taken. In declining immediate relief, the Court reiterated that ex-parte injunctions in defamation matters must satisfy stringent requirements of urgency, irreparable harm, and a demonstrably strong prima facie case.
The approach aligns with established jurisprudence flowing from decisions such as R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu and Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. v. SEBI, where courts have cautioned against gag orders that impinge upon the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, except where clearly justified by law. At the same time, the Court placed media defendants on notice that any further publications made after the date of the order would be subject to scrutiny, and any subsequent dissemination would carry legal consequences depending on its nature and content.
This observation reflects the balancing exercise courts routinely undertake between the right to reputation, recognised as an intrinsic facet of Article 21, and the constitutional protection accorded to fair reporting on matters of public interest. The controversy itself has assumed national significance following allegations that impure ghee, allegedly containing animal fats or fish oil, may have been used in the preparation of the revered laddu prasadam.
Given the sensitivity and public ramifications of the issue, the Supreme Court has already intervened by directing the constitution of an independent Special Investigation Team to ensure a fair, transparent, and credible inquiry. Justice Bansal issued summons to the defendant media organisations, including Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited and others, in the suit titled Yerram Venkata Subba Reddy & Anr. v. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited & Ors.
The High Court held that the interim injunction application would be taken up after the completion of pleadings and listed the matter for further hearing on January 29.
The post Tirupati laddu adulteration row: Delhi High Court refuses interim relief to YSRCP leader YV Subba Reddy appeared first on India Legal.