The Delhi High Court in the case observed and has restrained the wife of Indian cricketer Shikhar Dhawan from circulating the defamatory and false material against him on the print media or social among other individuals, wherein including the friends and relatives. In the present case, the cricketer and his wife have been living separately since August 2020. The said petition has been filed by him for divorce on the ground of cruelty under section 13(l) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Therefore, the wife and their child being the citizens of a foreign country. In the said case, the order has been passed by the court against the wife on an application being filed by the cricketer for ex-parte injunction wherein restraining her from circulating the alleged defamatory material. It has been submitted that the wife had circulated alleged defamatory and false messages against him on WhatsApp in order to malign his reputation and ruin his career.
The bench headed by Judge Harish Kumar of Patiala House Courts stated that the reputation of a person is dear to everyone and is considered as property of the highest degree because the materialistic property can be regained and after the said loss but the reputation cannot be regained once damaged. The court stated while observing that the reputation of an individual must be protected, it has also been added by the court that if anyone has lawful grievance against the other person, then he or she cannot be restrained from venting out of his or her grievance to the stated concerned authority.
The court stated that if the respondent or wife has real grievance against the petitioner and she cannot be restrained from making any grievance to concerned authority but she can certainly be restrained from sharing of the grievance of her against the petitioner in the plea with friends, the relatives, the peers of parties as well as from making it public even before approaching the appropriate authority in the case. However, it has also been stated by the court for restraining till the further orders from circulating any of her grievance against the petitioner or her version of the dispute or the alleged defamatory and false material on social media, to the print media or to any other forum or to friends, relatives, colleagues of the parties in the case. The court stated that it is being made clear that for her grievance, if any, against the petitioner, respondent is at liberty for approaching any authority appointed under the law of India or ( i.e., the foreign country) in this regard. It has also been directed by the court to facilitate the video call between the child and his father for 30 minutes everyday. The counsel, Advocate Aman Hingorani appearing for the cricketer.
