Delhi High Court - Orders
Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri vs Saket Gokhale on 8 July, 2021
Author: C. Hari Shankar
Bench: C. Hari Shankar
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 300/2021&I.A. 7941/2021, I.A. 7942/2021, I.A.
7943/2021, I.A. 7944/2021
LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv.
with Ms. Meghna Mishra, Mr.
Dheeraj P.Deo, Mr. Tarun
Sharma & Mr. Prabhas Bajaj,
Advs.
versus
SAKET GOKHALE ..... Defendant
Through: Mr. Sarim Naved, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 08.07.2021
(Video-Conferencing)
I.A.7941/2021in CS(OS) 300/2021
1. Subject to the plaintiff depositing the requisite court fees within four weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present.
2. The application is disposed of.
I.A.7942/2021in CS(OS) 300/2021
1. Subject to the plaintiff filing legible copies of any dim or illegible documents on which it may seek to place reliance within four weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI CS(OS) 300/2021 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:09.07.2021 21:19:152. The application is disposed of.
I.A.7943/2021 in CS(OS) 300/2021
1. The plaintiff is permitted to file additional documents, if she chooses, within four weeks from today.
2. The application stands disposed of accordingly.
CS(OS) 300/2021 & I.A. 7944/2021
1. Detailed arguments have been heard, as advanced by Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the plaintiff and Mr. Sarim Naved, learned Counsel for the defendant.
2. During the course of arguments, a query was put to Mr. Naved as to whether his client had approached any governmental or other official authority, or even sought any clarification from the plaintiff, before uploading the tweets with which the plaintiff is aggrieved. He answered in the negative. He points out, however, that the defendant "tagged" the Hon'ble Finance Minister in his first tweet which according to him, constitutes due notice to the Hon'ble Finance Minister.
3. A second query was put to Mr. Naved as to whether the law permitted any citizen, who had any grievance against a retired public servant or against a person standing for election, regarding any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI CS(OS) 300/2021 Page 2 of 3 Signing Date:09.07.2021 21:19:15 declaration or affidavit made by such person, to make allegations against such persons on social media platforms without, in the first instance, seeking any clarification in that regard either from the said person or from any competent public authority. Mr. Naved's response was that "unfortunately, that is the law".
4. Mr. Naved was, therefore, requested to provide any judgement, which would support such a stand. He has been unable to provide any such judgement. He candidly acknowledges that he has not come across any judgement to the said effect, but submits that that is his understanding of the law.
5. Before conclusion of proceedings, Mr. Naved was also directed to take instructions as to whether his client was willing to remove the tweets and other material against the plaintiff, as uploaded by him on the internet. He submits that his instructions are in the negative.
6. Orders are reserved to be pronounced on 13th July, 2021 at 10.30 A.M. C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JULY 8, 2021 Sahil Sharma Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI CS(OS) 300/2021 Page 3 of 3 Signing Date:09.07.2021 21:19:15