Arnab Goswami

In 2017, Shashi Tharoor brought a civil defamation action seeking 2 crore rupees from Arnab Goswami and Republic TV over broadcasts concerning Sunanda Pushkar's death. The Delhi High Court reiterated that the press could report the facts of the investigation but could not portray Tharoor as a criminal or guilty, and asked Goswami to moderate his rhetoric.

State of the evidence

Civil proceedings and Delhi High Court orders documented

Attribution

Personal editorial responsibility alleged

Arnab Goswami was prosecuted alongside two others following the deaths by suicide of architect Anvay Naik and his mother. A note attributed unpaid amounts to companies linked to the three men. Goswami was arrested in 2020; the case prompted prolonged litigation concerning its reopening, the investigation and procedural safeguards.

State of the evidence

FIR, arrest, interim release and subsequent proceedings documented

Attribution

Personal criminal responsibility alleged

Republic TV used an incorrect image to illustrate an alleged Congress office in Turkey. The channel issued a correction/apology. An FIR in Karnataka was stayed, while defamation proceedings were subsequently initiated in Delhi against Arnab Goswami and Republic.

State of the evidence

Acknowledged error, correction and proceedings documented

Attribution

Direct editorial responsibility disputed

Anil Ambani brought a defamation action against Republic TV and Arnab Goswami over reports concerning his businesses. In May 2026, the Bombay High Court suggested that the parties explore an amicable settlement.

State of the evidence

Litigation before the Bombay High Court documented

Attribution

Personal editorial responsibility alleged

A complaint by Karnataka Congress targeted Arnab Goswami over a report claiming that Siddaramaiah's convoy had blocked an ambulance. The Karnataka High Court quashed the proceedings against Goswami, noting in particular that he had been implicated because of his prominence without evidence of his direct involvement in the report.

State of the evidence

FIR and subsequent quashing by Karnataka High Court documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility alleged and subsequently rejected

A Rajasthan FIR targeted Arnab Goswami over Republic TV's coverage of a temple demolition in Rajgarh, alleged to encourage communal hostility. In 2025, the High Court stayed coercive measures and noted the apparent absence of substantive evidence personally linking Goswami to the alleged offence.

State of the evidence

FIR and Rajasthan High Court order documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility alleged

An FIR had included Goswami after a panellist made offensive remarks targeting the Marwari community on Republic. The Calcutta High Court quashed the proceedings against him; the presenters and other panellists had challenged the remarks during the broadcast.

State of the evidence

FIR and subsequent quashing by Calcutta High Court documented

Attribution

Responsibility by association alleged and subsequently rejected

Lawyer Vikram Singh Chauhan had sued Arnab Goswami for defamation after being called a 'goon'/'hooligan' in the context of violence at Patiala House Court surrounding Kanhaiya Kumar. The Delhi High Court ultimately quashed the proceedings.

State of the evidence

Complaint, summons and subsequent quashing documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility alleged, proceedings subsequently quashed

Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera approached the Delhi High Court after Arnab Goswami claimed, in the context of Operation Sindoor, that Congress was siding with the 'enemy of the nation'.

State of the evidence

Civil defamation action documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for broadcast remarks

Goswami and Republic TV were implicated in the Mumbai investigation into alleged manipulation of Television Rating Points. The case subsequently developed in Republic's favour: the Enforcement Directorate did not include Republic in its money-laundering charge sheet, and proceedings were closed or withdrawn.

State of the evidence

Police investigation, charges and judicial closures documented

Attribution

Personal and corporate responsibility alleged, but not pursued in the closed aspects of the case

R. K. Pachauri had initiated contempt proceedings against several media outlets and executives, claiming that they had disobeyed court restrictions on publishing sexual harassment allegations. In 2023, Arnab Goswami submitted an unconditional apology and was discharged from the proceedings.

State of the evidence

Contempt proceedings and apology documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility concerning compliance with a publication order

WhatsApp conversations attributed to Arnab Goswami and former BARC executive Partho Dasgupta sparked national controversy, particularly because they appeared to indicate that Goswami anticipated major military action before the Balakot strike. The Maharashtra government sought an opinion on a possible offence under the Official Secrets Act.

State of the evidence

Chats submitted in the TRP case and public controversy documented

Attribution

Direct allegation arising from conversations attributed to Goswami

Following a broadcast about the Palghar lynching, several complaints targeted Arnab Goswami over remarks accusing Sonia Gandhi, among others. The Supreme Court protected Goswami against multiple prosecutions but did not quash the main case solely because he disputed the allegations.

State of the evidence

Multiple FIRs and Supreme Court decisions documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility alleged for broadcast remarks

A separate FIR was registered in Mumbai following a Republic TV broadcast about the migrant gathering in Bandra, with complainants arguing that coverage had given the event a communal dimension by referring to Jama Masjid.

State of the evidence

FIR and constitutional litigation documented

Attribution

Personal editorial responsibility alleged

The Maharashtra Assembly initiated breach of privilege proceedings against Arnab Goswami over remarks made in his coverage of Sushant Singh Rajput's death about Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and other officials. The dispute subsequently extended to the transmission of Assembly documents to the Supreme Court.

State of the evidence

Privilege notice and Supreme Court intervention documented

Attribution

Person targeted by institutional proceedings

Bollywood associations and production companies brought proceedings before the Delhi High Court against Republic TV, Times Now, Arnab Goswami and other presenters, denouncing derogatory expressions and 'trials by media' in coverage of Sushant Singh Rajput's death and the investigation into Rhea Chakraborty.

State of the evidence

Collective civil action documented

Attribution

Personal editorial responsibility alleged

The News Broadcasting Standards Authority ordered Republic TV to broadcast an apology following a programme about Jignesh Mevani, finding, in particular, that certain comments by Arnab Goswami were unjustified and breached standards of neutrality and objectivity.

State of the evidence

NBSA decision reported

Attribution

Direct responsibility as presenter and broadcaster responsibility

Anti-nuclear activist S. P. Udayakumar accused Republic TV of using a false university identity to obtain an interview for a sting operation concerning his movement's funding, and approached the Press Council of India alleging harassment and deceptive practices.

State of the evidence

Public complaint and letter to the Press Council documented

Attribution

Disputed editorial/professional responsibility

Bennett Coleman & Co. / Times Group brought proceedings against Arnab Goswami after his departure from Times Now, alleging, among other things, that he had used recordings and material obtained while working for Times Now on Republic TV, including tapes related to Lalu Prasad and Sunanda Pushkar.

State of the evidence

Criminal complaint and civil proceedings documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility alleged

Ofcom found that, in 19 editions of Newshour broadcast in the United Kingdom, presenter Arnab Goswami's regular contributions promoted his own views in a manner that compromised the required impartiality.

State of the evidence

UK regulator's decision documented

Attribution

Direct responsibility as presenter