Delhi High Court Refers Anjana Om Kashyap-Khan Sir Defamation Dispute to Mediation, Orders Removal of Posts on Journalist’s Children

June 2, 2026 : The Delhi High Court has referred the civil defamation dispute between journalist Anjana Om Kashyap, TV Today Network and educator Faisal Khan, popularly known as Khan Sir, to mediation after observing that the parties were willing to explore an amicable settlement.

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while hearing the matter, directed the parties to appear before Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, who was appointed as the mediator, and listed the case for further consideration on July 9 to review the outcome of the mediation proceedings.

During the hearing, the Court interacted with both sides and noted that the dispute appeared capable of being resolved through dialogue rather than prolonged litigation. Recording the consensus of the parties, the Court observed that they had agreed to attempt a settlement through mediation under the supervision of a senior mediator.

As an interim measure, the Court directed Khan Sir and the other defendants to remove all social media posts containing details about Anjana Om Kashyap’s children. Simultaneously, the Court instructed Kashyap to refrain from making further remarks against the educators while the mediation process remains pending.

The Court observed that the defendants, being academicians engaged in educating students, ought not to have brought the personal details of a journalist’s children into a public controversy. It also advised both sides to identify the specific statements they considered objectionable and resolve their differences through mediation instead of continuing adversarial litigation.

The proceedings arise from a civil defamation suit filed by Anjana Om Kashyap and TV Today Network against Khan Sir, educators Abhinay Sharma, Babita Tyagi, Arvind Bhadauriya and Manish Yadav, several social media users, including certain X handles, and 4PM News Network. The plaintiffs have sought a permanent injunction directing the removal of allegedly defamatory content from digital and social media platforms and claimed damages of ₹2 crore for the alleged harm caused to their professional reputation, goodwill and journalistic credibility.

According to the plaint, the controversy began after Kashyap moderated a debate on Aaj Tak on May 29, 2026, regarding the NEET examination system. During the programme, she criticised the growing influence of online “star teachers” and the commercialization of education, asserting that her remarks constituted fair journalistic comment on an issue of public importance.

The plaintiffs alleged that between May 30 and June 4, several defendants, who have a significant presence on social media, launched a coordinated campaign targeting Kashyap and TV Today Network. Various videos and posts allegedly described Kashyap and Aaj Tak using expressions such as “bikau patrakar”, “chatukar”, “dalli”, “dalaali” and “fake news ki dukaan”, which the plaintiffs contend exceeded the limits of fair criticism and amounted to defamatory statements intended to damage their public reputation.

The suit further alleged that Khan Sir publicly disclosed the name of the school attended by Kashyap’s children, despite the information having no connection with the controversy. Kashyap argued that the disclosure exposed her family to harassment, unwanted public attention, security concerns and alleged threats to their safety.

During the hearing, counsel for Kashyap sought an interim injunction, contending that the impugned content was inherently defamatory and continued to cause irreparable reputational harm. It was also argued that disclosing the children’s personal details crossed every acceptable boundary of public criticism.

Counsel appearing for Khan Sir informed the Court that the posts referring to Kashyap’s children would be removed. At the same time, the defence requested that Kashyap also refrain from making further remarks against the educators. The Court observed that while criticism of public figures is permissible in a democratic society, it must remain within the limits of decency and civility. It further noted that although the impugned remarks may have been made in response to comments during a television debate, the language used appeared inappropriate and the dispute could potentially be resolved by removing the objectionable content.

The Delhi High Court has now referred the matter to mediation, giving the parties an opportunity to amicably settle the dispute before the defamation proceedings continue.