Mamata Banerjee Flags Free Speech Concerns After Calcutta HC's Video Takedown Order

Former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Tuesday alleged that freedom of speech and expression was being curtailed across the country under the BJP government, extending her support to students, social media users, vloggers, YouTubers and independent digital platforms amid a debate over online censorship.

In a post on X, Banerjee accused the government of disregarding Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and depriving citizens, including elected representatives, of their right to express themselves freely.

“We demand that they must be allowed to express themselves freely. Full strength to them as we, all together, fight this dangerous trend of censorship,” she wrote.

Banerjee criticises government's priorities

Banerjee also criticised the government over its handling of social media-related issues, urging it to focus instead on the Northeast and ensure the safety and security of people across the country.

Calcutta High Court orders video removal

Her remarks come amid a legal debate over online content following a Calcutta High Court order directing YouTube, X and Instagram to remove a video titled “How Modi and Adani Stole India: The Friendship Files”, along with clips and identical reproductions.

On October 26, Justice Aryak Dutt passed an interim defamation order in a suit filed by Adani Enterprises Limited against Sabeer Bhatia, who operates the YouTube channel Bcubed (Breaking Boundaries with Sabeer Bhatia) and the X account @sabeer.

Court cautions against restrictive injunctions

The court observed that the video contained serious factual allegations against the Adani Group and was presented as a dramatised narrative rather than a news report. The interim injunction is to remain in force until January 1, 2027, or until further orders.

However, the court also stressed that pre-trial injunctions in defamation cases involving matters of public interest must be granted with great caution, considering the public's right to know and the potential chilling effect on free expression.