Why Did the Delhi HC Criticize TMC MP Saket Gokhale's Affidavit?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Delhi High Court expressed serious concerns over TMC MP Saket Gokhale's affidavit related to a defamation case involving former diplomat Lakshmi Puri. This legal battle highlights the implications of public allegations and the necessity for accountability in expressing opinions online.
Key Takeaways
- Legal accountability is crucial for public figures.
- The court emphasized the importance of verified information in public discourse.
- Gokhale's case illustrates the potential repercussions of defamatory statements.
- Public apologies can be a necessary step in addressing false allegations.
- The legal landscape is evolving with regards to social media and free speech.
New Delhi, July 8 (NationPress) The Delhi High Court raised concerns on Tuesday regarding the affidavit submitted by Trinamool Congress Rajya Sabha MP Saket Gokhale in connection with his appeal against a ruling from July of the previous year. This ruling mandated him to pay Rs 50 lakh in damages to former diplomat Lakshmi Puri and to issue an apology in a newspaper and on his social media account on platform X for making inaccurate and unverified allegations.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar expressed dissatisfaction with Gokhale’s affidavit, particularly after his attorney pointed out that the document was defective and not properly filed. Justice Chawla emphasized that the language utilized was unacceptable, directing Gokhale to withdraw his current affidavit and submit a revised version.
The court clarified that the appeal would only be considered after the defective affidavit is retracted and a new one is filed with the registry. The next hearing is anticipated to take place on July 24. During the hearing, senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing Puri, referenced previous coercive orders, which had questioned Gokhale's compliance and necessitated the attachment of his parliamentary salary until the Rs 50 lakh was paid.
Last month, Gokhale issued an apology, stating in a post on X, "I unconditionally apologize for my tweets against Amb. Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri on June 13 and 23, 2021, which included erroneous and unverified allegations regarding her property purchases abroad, which I truly regret."
The defamation suit arose from Gokhale’s series of posts on X, which accused Lakshmi Puri, spouse of Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, of acquiring property in Switzerland that exceeded her income. He also implicated Hardeep Puri in his tweets.
The Delhi High Court determined that the plaintiff had experienced irreparable damage due to Gokhale's defamatory remarks, stating: "The defendant (Gokhale) is prohibited from disseminating further defamatory information about the plaintiff. Damages amounting to Rs 50,00,000 are awarded to the plaintiff for the harm inflicted on her reputation."
Point of View
This case underscores the delicate balance between free speech and accountability. The court's firm stance against unverified claims reflects the importance of integrity in public discourse. As the legal proceedings unfold, it will be crucial to observe how this impacts the broader conversation around responsible communication in today's digital age.
NationPress
21/07/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the defamation case about?
The defamation case involves TMC MP Saket Gokhale, who is accused of making false allegations against former diplomat Lakshmi Puri, leading to a court ruling that ordered him to pay damages.
What did the Delhi High Court say about Gokhale's affidavit?
The Delhi High Court found Gokhale's affidavit unsatisfactory and instructed him to withdraw it before his appeal could be heard.
What were the allegations made by Gokhale?
Gokhale accused Lakshmi Puri of purchasing property in Switzerland that was disproportionate to her income.
What are the consequences for Gokhale?
Gokhale is facing a court order to pay Rs 50 lakh in damages and issue a public apology.
When is the next hearing scheduled?
The next hearing for the case is expected to take place on July 24.
