In 2021, Saket Gokhale had tweeted that Lakshmi Puri had purchased property in Switzerland that was allegedly disproportionate to her income. Lakshmi Puri had strongly denied these claims and sued him for defamation.
NEW DELHI: Today, 15th May: The Delhi High Court has strongly directed Trinamool Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP Saket Gokhale to publicly apologise to Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri, a former Indian diplomat and wife of Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, for making defamatory social media posts about her in 2021.
This direction came in the contempt of court case titled Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri v. Saket Gokhale, where Puri had accused Gokhale of not following the Court’s previous judgment passed in July 2024.
In its July 1, 2024 judgment, the Delhi High Court had found Gokhale’s tweets to be defamatory and had directed him to:
- Pay Rs. 50 lakh as damages to Lakshmi Puri.
- Issue a public apology through a leading newspaper, Times of India, and also post it on his official X (formerly Twitter) account.
Despite the clear instructions, Gokhale failed to follow the order. As a result, Lakshmi Puri moved a contempt petition against him.
Gokhale’s lawyers told the Court that he was planning to file an appeal against the 2024 directions and suggested submitting the apology in a sealed cover until the appeal is decided.
However, Justice Anish Dayal rejected this proposal and firmly directed that the apology must be published within two weeks.
“The respondent is a Parliamentarian and a reputed member of the society. More than ten months have passed and till date there is no order that they have secured from the Court which would impede the compliance of the judgment/decree dated 01st July 2024. Accordingly, the proposal of placing the apology in a sealed cover is rejected and the apology as directed by the judgment/decree shall be published within the next two weeks, in the manner decreed,” the Court ruled in its May 9, 2025 order.
Background
In 2021, Saket Gokhale had tweeted that Lakshmi Puri had purchased property in Switzerland that was allegedly disproportionate to her income. Lakshmi Puri had strongly denied these claims and sued him for defamation.
The Delhi High Court had passed an interim order in July 2021, instructing Gokhale to remove the defamatory tweets and refrain from making similar posts against Lakshmi Puri and her husband, Minister Hardeep Singh Puri.
After a full trial, the High Court, in July 2024, ordered Gokhale to pay damages and apologise publicly.
Gokhale then filed an application seeking recall of the July 2024 judgment, but the High Court dismissed his application on May 2, 2025.
Despite this, Gokhale did not comply with the Court’s earlier ruling, prompting Lakshmi Puri to file a contempt petition.
During the hearing, Gokhale’s lawyer informed the Court that an appeal was being filed against the dismissal of the recall application. He also stated that the High Court had ordered the attachment of a portion of Gokhale’s salary to ensure compliance with the Rs. 50 lakh compensation order.
Again, his counsel requested that the apology be submitted in a sealed cover, arguing that it should not be made public until the appeal is decided. But the Court refused to allow this.
“In the opinion of this Court, there is no reason why the Court should take the apology in a sealed cover and then wait for the result of an appeal against the dismissal of Order IX Rule 13 CPC application, as and when the appeal is filed and adjudicated. Considering that the decree was passed in July 2024, no challenge was preferred in the statutory period, the challenge which was finally preferred was dimissed with a detailed judgment, and the respondent (Gokhale) has simply tarried, lingered and procrastinated, but still not complied with the judgment/decree,” said the Court.
The Court also pulled up Gokhale for not appearing in person when ordered to do so. He had claimed he tested positive for COVID, but failed to submit any test report.
“Counsel for the respondent states that the report was negative, and, therefore, it has not been appended. The Court is surprised at this assertion and the callous manner in which directions of the Court are being dealt with,” the judge observed.
Lawyers Representing Both Sides
- Saket Gokhale was represented by Advocates Amarjit Singh Bedi and Harsha Vinoy.
- Lakshmi Puri was represented by Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, assisted by Advocates Meghna Mishra, Palak Sharma, Shreyansh Rathi, R Mohan, and Amarpal Singh.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
