“Destroying reputation on social media become Child’s play”: Delhi High Court calls Saket Gokhale’s request to respond before passing of order “ironical”

In the defamation case filed against Mr. Saket Gokhale, Delhi High Court on Tuesday passed an order directing him to immediately delete his trail of tweets in connection with Ms. Lakshmi Puri. He has also been directed to refrain from publishing any defamatory, scandalous tweet anymore against Ms. Lakshmi Puri and her husband. 

The court order further stated that the Twitter, Inc. is directed to take down the tweets lest Mr. Gokhale fails to comply with the directions within 24 hours of the pronouncement of the order. 

The Delhi High Court Single Bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar stated, 

“I am unable to accede to the request of Mr. Naved (Counsel of Mr. Gokhale) to defer passing of orders in this application till the defendant has had an opportunity to respond by way of a reply.  Indeed, given the fact that the defendant did not choose it necessary to extend, to the plaintiff, any such courtesy before vilifying her through his Twitter campaign, the request of Mr. Naved is, at the very least, ironical.”

Case brief- 

On 13 June, Mr. Saket Gokhale published multiple tweets on his twitter account without naming Ms. Puri that she bought an apartment in Switzerland from Government salary during her tenure in Indian Foreign Services (IFS). 

Subsequently on 23 June, Mr. Gokhale named Ms. Puri in his tweets and accused Ms. Puri’s husband to be involved in the monetary fraud as well. 

Aggrieved by these scandalous tweets, Ms. Lakshmi Puri filed a defamation suit against Mr. Gokhale seeking a mandatory injunction against him to immediately take down the Tweets directed against her, with a further restraint from publishing any further Tweets levelling false allegations against the her or her family members.

Ms. Puri also filed an affidavit before the court stating all her income sources and showing that the purchase of the Swiss Apartment was actually done through a bank loan. 

The transactions shown in the affidavit have been held prima facie ‘perfectly legitimate’ by the court.

Ms. Puri’s counsel Sr. Advocate Mr. Maninder Singh contended before the court that Mr. Gokhale is a pseudo-activist, whos intent is only to blackmail vulnerable persons in public life, and submitted that ‘the entire game plan of the defendant appeared from the beginning, to be to link the Ms. Puri and her husband, with “black money” stashed in Switzerland and that this constituted, clearly and prima facie, defamation of the Ms. Puri.’

However, it was contended by counsel of Mr. Gokhale that him being an ‘activist’ and as IFS servants are public servants, his tweets regarding Ms. Puri constituted a mere “notice” to the  Finance Minister regarding the issue which he desired to highlight. 

Allowing the interim reliefs sought by Ms’ Puri, the court observed, 

“In the age of social media, desecration of the reputation of a public figure has become child’s play.  All that is needed is the opening of a social media account and, thereafter, the posting of messages on the account….… The damage that the plaintiff, and her husband, have suffered, as a result of the tweets of the defendant is apparent; but that is one of the unavoidable pitfalls of access to social media platforms and the way in which they work, by those who abuse their facility, as the defendant has, in the present case, prima facie chosen to do.”

Also, recognizing Mr. Gokhale’s right to respond on allegations made against him, the court reserved his right to seek modification or vacation of the present order, by following the procedure prescribed in law in that regard. 

Case Title- LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI versus SAKET GOKHALE