Journalist Anjana Om Kashyap and TV Today Network initiated legal action against educator Faisal Khan, other teachers, and social media accounts. They allege defamatory statements were made against them online.
Anchor Anjana Om Kashyap Sends Rs 2 Crore Defamation Notice To Khan Sir
Apart from Khan Sir, the case names educators Abhinay Sharma, Babita Tyagi and Arvind Bhadauriya as defendants. Several X accounts and 4PM News Network have also been included in the lawsuit.

- Journalist Anjana Kashyap, TV Today sued for defamation.
- Suit targets Khan Sir, others for alleged online campaign.
- Plea cites child's personal data disclosure as egregious.
- Plaintiffs seek content removal, Rs 2 crore compensation.
Journalist Anjana Om Kashyap and TV Today Network have approached the Delhi High Court seeking legal action against educator Faisal Khan, popularly known as Khan Sir, along with several teachers, social media accounts and a news platform over allegedly defamatory statements made against them online. They have requested directions restraining the defendants from publishing similar material in the future. The suit further seeks compensation of Rs 2 crore.
The matter is scheduled to be heard on June 8 by a vacation bench headed by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna. In their plea, Kashyap and the media network have sought the removal of content they claim is defamatory and damaging to their reputation.
Also Read: INDIA Bloc Leaders To Meet In Delhi Shortly. What Is On Agenda?
Apart from Khan Sir, the case names educators Abhinay Sharma, Babita Tyagi and Arvind Bhadauriya as defendants. Several X accounts and 4PM News Network have also been included in the lawsuit.
According to the petition, the dispute originated after a discussion aired on Aaj Tak on May 29, during which Kashyap commented on the rising influence of online educators and the increasing commercialisation of the education sector. The plaintiffs argue that the remarks were part of a legitimate journalistic debate on an issue of public importance.
The suit alleges that between May 30 and June 4, multiple individuals launched a coordinated online campaign targeting Kashyap and the network. It claims that videos, social media posts and broadcasts carried derogatory remarks against the journalist and the channel, using abusive labels and questioning their credibility.
What Did The Plea Say?
The petition contends that the criticism crossed the boundaries of fair comment and descended into personal attacks, exposing the plaintiffs to ridicule and public hostility.
A key allegation in the suit relates to the disclosure of personal information concerning Kashyap's family. The petition claims that Khan Sir publicly referred to details about the school attended by her child, an act the plaintiffs argue was unrelated to the controversy and created privacy and security concerns.
According to the filing, the disclosure subjected the journalist's family to unwanted public attention and posed potential risks to their safety. The suit maintains that the alleged campaign caused harm not only to the reputation of the journalist and the media organisation but also affected their privacy and well-being.
The petition has been filed through advocates Hrishikesh Baruah, Utkarsh Dwivedi and Pragya Agarwal. The Delhi High Court is expected to take up the matter during the vacation hearing.
Before You Go
BREAKING: UP Action Intensifies Against Azam Khan's Jauhar University Over Alleged Illegal Structures
Frequently Asked Questions
Who filed the lawsuit against Khan Sir and others?
What are the plaintiffs seeking in the lawsuit?
They are seeking to restrain defendants from publishing similar material, the removal of defamatory content, and compensation of Rs 2 crore for damages.
What sparked the dispute leading to this lawsuit?
The dispute began after Anjana Om Kashyap discussed the rising influence and commercialisation of online education on Aaj Tak on May 29.
What is a significant privacy-related allegation in the suit?
The suit alleges Khan Sir publicly disclosed details about Kashyap's child's school, which the plaintiffs argue created privacy and security concerns for her family.


























