A Chandigarh court has temporarily restrained Justice Ranjit Singh (retd), SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia and Congress leader Sukhpal Singh Khaira from publishing or circulating any unverified defamatory content on social media or through any other medium regarding the alleged demand for a bribe that could harm the interests or reputation of Gurpreet Kaur, wife of Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, until further orders.Civil Judge (Junior Division) Dr Prikshit passed the order on a suit filed by Gurpreet Kaur seeking damages and an injunction. The court issued notices on both the suit and the stay application to the defendants for September 30.Seeking an ex parte hearing, counsel for the plaintiff argued that she had a strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience lay in her favour. If the injunction is not granted, the plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss and injury which shall not be compensated by any means, the counsel submitted.In its order, the court observed that the plaintiff had been able to establish a prima facie case. It noted that the posts, videos and photographs shared by the defendants concerning the plaintiff did not appear to be supported by any cogent proof.The court further observed that the defendants had allegedly relied on unverified material without establishing its authenticity, particularly when the person claimed to have acted as an intermediary between the plaintiff and others had turned hostile. It noted that the posts had already garnered significant public attention and reiterated that reputation formed an integral part of an individual’s dignity, requiring a balance between freedom of speech and the right to reputation.“If the freedom of speech and expression of defendants is not curtailed so as to prevent the defamation of the plaintiff, she will suffer irreparable loss,” the court said, noting that Gurpreet Kaur was a prominent public figure as the spouse of a sitting Chief Minister.The court, therefore, restrained the defendants from publishing, circulating or posting any unverified defamatory content concerning the plaintiff until further orders. However, it declined, at this stage, to direct the removal, deletion or takedown of the posts, videos and photographs cited in the suit, stating that the defendants must first be heard. Granting such relief without hearing them, the court said, would amount to allowing the main relief sought in the suit at the threshold itself, which was not permissible.