‘Entrepreneur’ Assures Delhi HC of Removing Defamatory Cover Story on Ashneer Grover

The US based Entrepreneur magazine on Friday assured the Delhi High Court that it would remove its cover story on Ashneer Grover, which allegedly contained defamatory statements against BharatPe.

The Indian edition of Entrepreneur had published a cover story titled “Fraud or Framed? The Curious Case of Ashneer Grover” in its June-July issue.

The magazine’s counsel stated that, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the story and podcast would be taken down from their website and social media platforms. Additionally, the magazine’s August issue would include a corrigendum announcing the withdrawal of the article.

“Impugned article and podcast shall be removed from the website and social media and the defendants (the magazine, its publisher and the journalist) shall publish a corrigendum in their forthcoming issue stating that views expressed in the impugned article are that of Defendant No 13 (Ashneer Grover) and not of defendants 1-12 (magazine, journalist and publishers) and since the matter is sub judice the defendants have withdrawn the impugned article,” the counsel informed the bench.

The undertaking to remove the article will be fulfilled within one to two days, the magazine’s counsel stated. This assurance came after Justice Jyoti Singh reviewed the article and remarked that it appeared to be defamatory and should be taken down.

Justice Singh was dealing with a defamation suit filed by BharatPe against the magazine and Ashneer Grover.

BharatPe claimed that despite previous court orders in which both parties had assured not to use inappropriate language against each other, Grover had made similar allegations. Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, representing BharatPe, argued that the allegations made in the article were repeated from their earlier lawsuit against Grover. Although Grover’s counsel in the previous suit had claimed that the social media posts containing these allegations had been removed, the same statements now appeared in the magazine’s story.

The magazine’s counsel argued that it was not the publication or the journalist who had made these allegations, but Grover himself. They further stated that Grover had even called them and threatened that the article should be published.

However, the magazine’s counsel informed the court that Grover later called again and requested the removal of certain unauthorized call recordings used in their podcast. The magazine’s counsel characterized Grover’s actions as a somersault.

The Bench expressed skepticism, suggesting that this may be a cover-up when Grover realized that the statements violated the court’s previous orders. Sibal humorously remarked that accusing them of being dim would be unjustified. Notably, Grover was not represented in court during the hearing.

The Bench issued summons on the suit and scheduled the case before the joint registrar on August 28. The matter will be further heard in November.