Chief minister Bhagwant Mann’s wife, Dr Gurpreet Kaur, has expressed no objection to the removal of former Punjab and Haryana high court judge justice Ranjit Singh’s name from the array of defendants in her defamation suit, her counsel told the court on Tuesday.
The development comes nearly a month after Ranjit Singh moved an application seeking ₹50,000 in compensation from Kaur under Section 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), alleging that she had obtained an interim injunction against him on insufficient grounds.
Appearing for Kaur, advocate Sukhbir Singh told the court that she was unaware of Ranjit Singh’s complete statement when she filed the suit. He submitted that the former judge had clarified that the material published by DD News anchor Bhawna Nair was incomplete and did not reflect his full statement. The former judge has maintained that he never intended to defame Kaur.
Kaur’s counsel said she had sent a legal notice to the former judge on August 22, seeking clarification on his stand, but received no response. She came to know of his complete statement only after filing the suit and, therefore, there was no concealment of facts on her part, he argued.
Kaur, however, has made the removal of Ranjit Singh’s name conditional on his agreeing to the deletion of the allegedly incomplete material published by the TV journalist from all social media platforms.
The former judge’s counsel, advocate Charanjit Singh Bakshi, opposed the statement and questioned Kaur’s conduct, alleging that she had failed to follow the doctrine of reasonable inquiry before initiating proceedings.
Kaur had filed the damages suit against the former judge, Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia, Congress leader Sukhpal Singh Khaira and the TV journalist over alleged defamatory remarks linking her to a purported ₹5-crore demand from an accused in a rape case.
Earlier, the court had vacated the ex parte interim injunction granted against the former judge on September 8, observing that the plaintiff had not disclosed material facts while seeking the relief. It had also left the former judge at liberty to initiate separate proceedings seeking compensation for the injunction obtained against him on insufficient grounds. The court has now posted the matter for further arguments on November 25.