Some words used by Punjab Kesari improper but public persons should be thick skinned: Delhi High Court on Gautam Gambhir defamation suit

The Delhi High Court Wednesday observed that even though some of the words used by Punjab Kesari newspaper in its reporting on ex-cricketer and BJP Member of Parliament (MP) Gautam Gambhir were improper, a public person must be thick skinned. .Justice Chandra Dhari Singh did not pass any injunction order against the newspaper today but issued notice on Gambhir's defamation suit against the newspaper and his plea for interim relief.The bench also did not grant Gambhir's request to take down one of the news reports which allegedly used words like achhoot (untouchable). "Any public person should be thick skinned. With this social media and all even judges have to be thick skinned," the Court stated.However, the bench remarked that the stories highlighted by Gambhir did give an impression that the reporter of the newspaper was after Gambhir and some of the words or sentences used may not be proper for the paper."If you read all the articles, it is my prima facie opinion that the reporter is behind this person. Some of the words and sentences that he has used is not proper for your paper," the judge remarked.The case will now be considered on October 18, 2023. .Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai appeared for Gambhir and argued that the articles cited by the cricketer were beyond the purview of fair and objective reporting. "These two reporters, maybe at the behest of someone else, are targeting me. I ignored them at multiple occasions but this has been like a campaign. They are showing me as someone who is not interested in serving the people of my constituency and is busy with the IPL... One of the articles say that I practise untouchability," the counsel said. Justice Singh responded, "If the reporter has gone to the area and found such comments being made then... You are a public servant, an elected person, you need not be so sensitive."Dehadrai submitted that he is asking for an injunction and directions that the reporters should take Gambhir's version while publishing stories. This is the normal journalistic practice, he said. However, the Bench said it will not pass any blanket order. "There can't be a blanket order. What article is defamatory what is not... As per me, the first article is not defamatory. Any blanket order can't be there," Justice Singh said. .Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao appeared for the paper and its editor and stated that the suit was published by Bar & Bench website before even before it was heard by court.He said several other publications have carried stories on Gambhir on similar lines but he has only sued Punjab Kesari. "The difficulty is that this person decides to become an MP, he has decided to sail in two boats... They should explain, are they saying don't report on me unless Gautam Gambhir likes it? My friend is so touchy about Punjab Kesari, why is he not so touchy about other publications" the senior counsel argued. He added that some of the words may been used in a better way but still this does not amount to defamation..After considering the arguments, the bench proceeded to issue notice on the application for injunction. It also issued summons on the suit. In its order, the bench recorded that prima facie, many of the articles are indicative of willful campaign launched by the Defendants (Punjab Kesari and its journalists) to lower Gambhir's reputation in the eyes of his constituents, supporters and the public at large. "In the opinion of this Court, this does not befit a newspaper of the repute and stature of the defendants to indulge in such a conduct," the court added. .Gambhir has sued the paper, its editor Aditya Chopra as well as correspondents Amit Kumar and Imran Khan stating that they misused their journalistic freedom by publishing numerous malicious and libelous articles systematically targeting him.In his suit Gambhir cited a bunch of reports to claim that paper gave a misleading spin to its stories. One of the reports even went on to compare him with the mythical demon Bhasmasur, it was contended.Some of the reports mentioned in the suit are:Sansad Gautam Gambhir Lapata Gali-Gali Me Lage Poster (MP Gautam Gambhir goes missing, posters come up in streets);Dilli ke lapata Sansad Lucknow Super Giants ke liye bane Bhasmasur (Delhi's missing MP becomes Bhasmasur for Lucknow Super Giants);Adesh Gupta bolte reh gaye, Gautam Gambhir uth chale (Adesh Gupta kept talking, Gautam Gambhir left);Ye Naye Mijaz ke Sansad hai Jara Faaslo se Mila Karo (This is the MP of a new frame of mind, please keep distance while meeting him)..Gambhir argued that these reports created a false and deeply defamatory narrative regarding his work and bona fides as a parliamentarian in the minds of readers.The reports paint him as a casteist person and a high-nosed politician, it was pointed out..Gambhir has sought damages of ₹2 crores to be given to charitable organisations. He also prayed that the defendants should tender an unconditional apology and the same should be published in all newspapers (including digital versions) circulated by Punjab Kesari.He also submitted that directions should be issued to the paper to retract each and every defamatory publication made against him..Advocates Jai Anant Dehadrai and Martin G George appeared for Gautam Gambhir.Senior Advocate Raj Shekhar Rao with advocate Dhruv Chawla appeared for Punjab Kesari and its editor Aditya Chopra. .[Read Order]