Why is the Delhi HC warning Trinamool MP Saket Gokhale of civil imprisonment?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Delhi High Court has raised concerns over Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale's potential civil imprisonment for failing to settle a Rs 50 lakh defamation ruling. This case underscores the serious implications of defamation in today's political landscape and highlights the judiciary's role in upholding reputations.
Key Takeaways
- Delhi High Court emphasizes accountability in defamation cases.
- Trinamool MP Saket Gokhale faces civil imprisonment.
- Damages of Rs 50 lakh awarded to Lakshmi Puri.
- Public apology mandated by the court.
- Importance of verifying information before publication.
New Delhi, May 28 (NationPress) The Delhi High Court has questioned why Trinamool Congress Rajya Sabha member Saket Gokhale should not be sentenced to civil imprisonment due to his non-payment of Rs 50 lakh in damages from a defamation case involving former diplomat Lakshmi Puri, who is married to Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, presiding over a single-judge Bench, was addressing a petition from Lakshmi Puri that sought the enforcement of a judgment rendered in July of the previous year.
The Delhi High Court previously mandated that the Trinamool leader pay Rs 50 lakh in damages due to the defamation lawsuit initiated by Lakshmi Puri. Additionally, Gokhale was instructed to publicly apologize in a newspaper and on his social media account, X, within four weeks for disseminating false and unverified allegations. The court also stipulated that the apology tweet on Gokhale’s X account must remain visible for a period of six months.
In April, the court ordered that Gokhale's parliamentary salary be withheld until he deposits the Rs 50 lakh with the court registry. In December of the previous year, the Delhi High Court had acknowledged a contempt petition from Lakshmi Puri against Gokhale for his “intentional and willful non-compliance” with the court’s ruling.
The court required that the Rajya Sabha member submit an affidavit within four weeks detailing all his assets, properties, bank accounts, and deposits.
The defamation lawsuit stemmed from Gokhale’s repeated posts on X accusing Lakshmi Puri of acquiring property in Switzerland that was disproportionate to her income, implicating Hardeep Puri in his tweets as well.
The Delhi High Court determined that the plaintiff sustained irreparable damage due to Gokhale's defamatory remarks, stating: "The defendant (Gokhale) is prohibited from publishing any further defamatory material against the plaintiff. Damages of Rs 50,00,000 are awarded to the plaintiff for the injury to her reputation."
On May 2, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav dismissed the Trinamool Congress’s plea to overturn the ruling from July of last year.
Point of View
We observe that the judicial system remains steadfast in addressing issues of defamation, ensuring that individuals are held accountable for their public statements. This case exemplifies the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the protection of personal reputation, a critical aspect of our democratic values.
NationPress
08/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the basis of the defamation case against Saket Gokhale?
The defamation case against Saket Gokhale is based on his social media posts that accused former diplomat Lakshmi Puri of financially mismanaging her property investments.
What are the repercussions Saket Gokhale faces?
Saket Gokhale faces potential civil imprisonment for failing to pay the ordered damages and has been warned that his parliamentary salary may be attached until the payment is made.
What did the Delhi High Court order regarding the apology?
The Delhi High Court ordered Gokhale to publish an apology in a newspaper and on his social media platform, X, within four weeks, with the apology tweet remaining visible for six months.
How did Gokhale's actions impact Lakshmi Puri?
The court found that Gokhale's defamatory statements caused irreparable harm to Lakshmi Puri's reputation, which prompted the damages ruling.
What did the court require from Gokhale regarding his assets?
The court required Gokhale to submit an affidavit disclosing all his assets, properties, and bank accounts within a specified timeframe.
