The Gujarat High Court has refused to quash an FIR against journalist and Adani hater Ravi Nair over an October 2025 report alleging that the Government of India and the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) had indicated plans for around $3.9 billion in investment in Adani Group companies, triggering a sharp reaction from journalist Dhanya Rajendran, as reported in OpIndia.
Nair had challenged the FIR and criminal proceedings, arguing, among other things, that Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd (APSEZ) had already initiated defamation proceedings over similar allegations. The High Court rejected his plea, allowing the investigation to continue.
Following the verdict, Gujarat Police, accompanied by Delhi Police, visited Nair’s residence after obtaining a judicial magistrate’s order authorising the seizure of electronic devices as part of the investigation.
Rajendran started having a meltdown over the police action only against Nair and not Washington Post. On her X handle, she claimed that officers seized two of Nair’s phones, his son’s laptop and the laptop and iPad of a colleague who happened to be present at the residence. She also questioned why the police allegedly did not provide hash values for the seized devices.
Notably, Rajendran’s own account acknowledged that the police had a judicial magistrate’s order authorising the seizure.
She also questioned why the complaint was filed over Nair’s social media post rather than directly against The Washington Post, alleging that this was intended to keep the newspaper out of the FIR.
Rajendran’s criticism focused on the seizure and the manner in which the investigation was being conducted. Questions over forensic procedures and the seizure of devices belonging to people who are not accused can certainly be raised. However, those questions are separate from the Gujarat High Court’s decision to allow the underlying investigation to continue.
What Is The Adani-LIC Case About?
The FIR stems from an 24 October 2025 Washington Post report claiming that the Government of India and LIC had indicated plans for around $3.9 billion of public-fund investment in Adani Group companies.
According to the complaint filed by APSEZ, the report relied on documents containing details such as investment conditions, bond ratings and internal approvals.
Nair posted about the report on X shortly after its publication.
LIC rejected the report on October 25, stating that its investments were made independently under Board-approved policies and after due diligence.
Nair subsequently questioned LIC’s denial and posted screenshots purportedly showing portions of the documents cited in the report.
APSEZ then approached LIC seeking verification of the documents. According to the complaint, LIC responded on October 28 that it had neither issued nor received the documents and had received no government information or instruction to invest in Adani Group companies.
APSEZ subsequently submitted LIC’s response and relevant stock-exchange disclosures to investigators.
The company alleges that the documents used to support the report were “false and fabricated from the beginning” and that fabricated documents were presented as genuine. It further alleges that the material caused financial losses and apprehension among potential investors and was used to damage the reputation of Adani companies.
These are allegations and have not been established as findings of guilt.
Nair’s Previous Adani Defamation Conviction
The latest case also comes against the backdrop of Nair’s separate criminal defamation conviction involving Adani Enterprises Ltd.
On February 10, 2026, a Judicial Magistrate First Class court in Mansa, Gandhinagar, convicted Nair over tweets and online articles published between October 2020 and July 2021.
He was sentenced to one year of simple imprisonment and fined ₹5,000. The court rejected his defence of fair criticism and public interest, holding that the publications contained allegations of corruption, manipulation and political patronage.
The sentence was subsequently suspended for one month and Nair was granted bail to pursue an appeal.
The present FIR invokes BNS Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(4) and 340(2), concerning cheating, forgery, forgery intended to harm reputation and using a forged document or electronic record as genuine.
The Gujarat High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR means the investigation into the alleged documents and their use in the LIC-Adani investment report will continue.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
