Delhi High Court orders Saket Gokhale to issue public apology to Lakshmi Puri within two weeks

The Delhi High Court recently directed Trinamool Congress leader and Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament Saket Gokhale to issue a public apology to former diplomat Lakshmi Puri for defamatory social media posts made in 2021 [Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri v. Saket Gokhale]..The High Court had last year ruled that Gokhale's tweets were defamatory and directed him to pay Lakshmi Puri ₹50 lakhs as damages, apart from publishing an apology in the Times of India newspaper and on his X handle. Lakshmi Puri later moved the High Court, accusing Gokhale of contempt of court for not complying with these directions. In response, Gokhale's counsel suggested that he could submit an apology in a sealed cover until a plea filed by Gokhale against the High Court's 2024 directions is finally decided. .However, Justice Anish Dayal has now rejected this request and directed Gokhale to publish the apology 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. 20. 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 said in its May 9 ruling. .Gokhale has simply tarried, lingered and procrastinated, but still not complied with the judgment/ decree.Delhi High Court.Lakshmi Puri is the wife of Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas Hardeep Singh Puri. In 2021, she sued Gokhale over social media posts by which he alleged that she had purchased certain property in Switzerland which was disproportionate to her income.In July 2021, the Court passed an interim order directing Gokhale to remove the tweets and refrain from posting any defamatory content against the Puris.In the final judgment delivered in July 2024, the High Court directed Gokhale to pay ₹50 lakh damages to Lakshmi Puri and also publish an apology.Gokhale later moved an application for the recall of the judgment ordering him to pay damages. On May 2, 2025, the High Court dismissed his application..Lakshmi Puri filed the present contempt of court case earlier this year, accusing Gokhale of not obeying the High Court's 2024 directions. Gokhale's counsel informed that he is filing an appeal against the dismissal of his recall application. He pointed out that the High Court had recently ordered the attachment of a part of Gokhale's salary until the sum of ₹50 lakhs is deposited. Gokhale's counsel also suggested that he could submit an apology in a sealed cover until this appeal is finally decided..The Court, however, has refused to show any such leniency. It further pulled up Gokahle for not being present in court when ordered to do so by citing a COVID test. Gokhale had also failed to submit a report of the test to the Court despite being ordered to do so. "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 Court said..The Court then noted that the judgment dismissing the recall application was a detailed one. It pointed out that Gokhale had not challenged the July 2024 decree in the defamation suit within the statutory period for filing appeals. As such, there was no reason to delay complying with the directions any longer, the Court said. "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 (Gokale) has simply tarried, lingered and procrastinated, but still not complied with the judgment/decree," the order stated. .Gokhale was represented by advocates Amarjit Singh Bedi and Harsha Vinoy.Senior Advocate Maninder Singh appeared on behalf of Puri. He was instructed by advocates Meghna Mishra, Palak Sharma, Shreyansh Rathi, R Mohan, and Amarpal Singh..[Read Order]