Rajdeep Sardesai

In 2011, a sting broadcast by the IBN group portrayed BJP representative Ajit Tokas as implicated in a demand for a bribe. Following years of challenges and a lack of sufficient evidence against Tokas, Rajdeep Sardesai issued a public apology in 2025.

State of the evidence

Public apology and investigative context documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility for broadcasting an unsubstantiated allegation

Following a televised altercation with Shazia Ilmi, Sardesai published a video recorded in her home after the debate. The Delhi High Court distinguished remarks/commentary protected by their substantial truth from the 40-second recording found to infringe privacy, and ordered its removal.

State of the evidence

Delhi High Court decisions documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility partially upheld in relation to privacy

Sardesai, Aroon Purie and other India Today executives were sued for defamation over a sting concerning Karnataka politics, with the complainant challenging, among other things, the presentation and editing of the content. After the High Court declined to quash the proceedings, the Supreme Court stayed them.

State of the evidence

Criminal proceedings and Supreme Court stay documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility alleged

During the violence of 26 January 2021, Sardesai claimed that protester Navreet Singh had been shot dead by the police. He withdrew the claim after contradictory evidence emerged. India Today sanctioned him, and several FIRs, some alleging sedition, targeted journalists who had reported similar accounts.

State of the evidence

Acknowledged error, internal sanction and proceedings documented

Attribution

Personal editorial responsibility for a withdrawn report

CNN-IBN had broadcast a report implicating police officer Rajiv Trivedi in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh case. Sardesai and others eventually issued an unconditional apology for the incorrect information and were acquitted in the defamation proceedings.

State of the evidence

Apology and favourable judicial outcome documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility acknowledged through the apology, without a final conviction

Defamation proceedings targeted Rajdeep Sardesai and others following CNN-IBN's coverage of a land-allocation controversy involving the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority.

State of the evidence

Judicial proceedings documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility alleged and subsequently rejected

Sardesai published a photograph incorrectly identifying the Vice-Chancellor of Banaras Hindu University as taking part in a Narendra Modi roadshow. After the error was pointed out, he deleted the post and apologised for "mistaken identity".

State of the evidence

Incorrect tweet and public apology documented

Attribution

Direct personal responsibility for an incorrect publication

IBN-7 broadcast a sting called "Shaitan Doctor", accusing physician Ajai Agarwal, among other things, of performing amputations to facilitate begging. Subsequent investigations did not corroborate the allegations, and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting warned the channel and required an apology. Sardesai, then Editor-in-Chief, was among those sued for defamation.

State of the evidence

Professional investigations, ministerial warning and judicial decisions documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility by virtue of his position; specific personal involvement not established

During Narendra Modi's visit to New York in 2014, Rajdeep Sardesai was involved in a physical altercation with Modi supporters outside Madison Square Garden. Video clips circulated widely and fuelled controversy about who had started the confrontation.

State of the evidence

Videos and conflicting witness accounts documented

During the July 2008 confidence vote, CNN-IBN possessed footage linked to allegations of bribes offered to MPs. The channel faced strong criticism, particularly from the BJP, for not broadcasting the sting footage immediately and instead handing the material to the Speaker.

State of the evidence

Controversy and CNN-IBN's explanation documented

Attribution

Editorial responsibility as channel executive