Indian Court Blocks Modi-Adami Documentary Film, Raising Free Speech Concerns
Author: Aamnah Fatima Khan
October 30, 2026
HRRC raises serious concerns about the freedom of expression and the public’s right to access information on matters of public interest. HRRC calls for the case to be considered with due regard for free speech, privacy, and the right to a fair judicial process.
![Calcutta High Court building, where the court case was heard. [Image credit: Avrajyoti Mitra/Wikimedia Commons]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/f05ed1_7b9160bf94a4441da48050900c6aae26~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_960,h_729,al_c,q_85,enc_avif,quality_auto/f05ed1_7b9160bf94a4441da48050900c6aae26~mv2.jpg)
The Calcutta High Court has ordered the removal of a documentary film, The Friendship Files, produced by Hotmail co-founder Sabeer Bhatia. The film alleges cronyism between the Indian Prime Minister and Indian billionaire Gautam Adani. Cronyism is a situation in which someone important gives jobs to friends rather than to independent people who have the necessary skills and experience. The interim injunction will remain in force until 31 January 2027 unless the court orders otherwise.
The order came following a defamation case brought by Adani Enterprises, accusing the film of false accusations and omission of material facts. On the other hand, Bhatia has defended the documentary film despite repeated denials of allegations of cronyism by the Indian government and Adani Group.
The court described the film as a dramatised and sensationalised narrative presented as factual. It directed Instagram, X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube to remove or disable access to the video at specific links and preserve information relating to the listing accounts and uploads. The platforms were asked to disclose basic subscriber information for unidentified account holders to the court in a sealed cover.
The case raises serious concerns regarding the freedom of expression, access to information and privacy. Removing a documentary before final resolution of the defamation case can limit public debate on matters of public interest. Preserving and disclosing account information also raises questions about the privacy of people who share political content. These concerns originate from the court order, not from a finding that a human rights violation has occurred.
The court stated that its order does not prevent constructive criticism or fair reporting on Adani, his company or government policy outside the specified material. The court further stated that protecting the reputation of Indian enterprises is also a consideration in the case.
The case is not the only case of such kind. In 2023, the Indian government used its emergency powers to block online links to a BBC documentary examining Modi’s role during the 2022 Gujarat riots. Critics described that action as an attack on press freedom.
Glossary
Accusations – a statement saying that someone has done something morally wrong, illegal, or unkind, or the act of accusing someone.
Allegation – a statement, made without giving proof, that someone has done something wrong or illegal.
Cronyism – the situation in which someone important gives jobs to friends rather than to independent people who have the necessary skills and experience.
Defamation – the action of damaging the reputation of a person or group by saying or writing bad things about them that are not true.
Injunction – a court order that directs a person to do something or to stop doing something.
Interim – temporary and intended to be used or accepted until something permanent exists.
Narrative – a story or a description of a series of events.
Omission – the act of not including something or someone that should have been included, or something or someone that has not been included that should have been.
Riots – an occasion when a large number of people behave in a noisy, violent, and uncontrolled way in public, often as a protest.
Sensationalised – to present information in a way that tries to make it as shocking or exciting as possible.
References
