In a development that underscores a familiar political pattern, Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale has issued a public apology to former diplomat Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri, ending a years-long defamation case. Gokhale’s 2021 tweets had falsely questioned Puri’s purchase of a property in Geneva, Switzerland. The Delhi High Court, after repeated delays and even warnings of civil detention, mandated the apology and imposed a ₹50 lakh penalty for damages. Additionally, the court barred Gokhale from making further defamatory statements.
This episode is not an isolated incident—it’s part of a larger, recurring trend where opposition politicians make provocative, often unverified allegations, only to backtrack when confronted by legal consequences or public backlash.
A Repetitive Political Strategy
From Rahul Gandhi to Digvijaya Singh, several Congress leaders have followed what is now seen as a standard playbook: stir controversy, dominate news cycles, and then retract or apologise when legal action looms.
A prime example is Rahul Gandhi’s 2014 statement blaming the RSS for Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. The issue escalated to the Supreme Court, where he clarified that his comment referred to individuals “associated with” the RSS, not the organisation itself. Despite his initial boldness, legal scrutiny forced him to step back.
In 2016, Rahul Gandhi again stirred controversy by accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of benefiting from “khoon ki dalali” – alleging political exploitation of the Indian Army’s surgical strikes. Following massive public outrage, Gandhi issued a clarification that he supported the armed forces and his criticism was aimed at political leaders, not the military.
Courtroom Compulsions and Political U-turns
In 2019, during the Rafale controversy, Gandhi again found himself in hot water. By linking the “Chowkidar Chor Hai” slogan to a Supreme Court verdict, he misled the public into believing that the Court had confirmed corruption in the deal. A criminal contempt notice forced him to apologise unconditionally, admitting that the remarks were made in the heat of political campaigning.
The trend doesn’t stop with Gandhi. Congress veteran Mani Shankar Aiyar called Modi a “neech kisam ka aadmi” (a lowly man) in 2017, triggering national outrage. The Congress swiftly suspended him, and Aiyar later backpedaled, claiming his words were misinterpreted. Still, the political damage was done.
Jairam Ramesh, another senior Congress leader, accused NSA Ajit Doval’s son, Vivek Doval, of financial misconduct based on an unverified media article. A defamation case followed, and Ramesh eventually issued a written apology, admitting he failed to fact-check before making public allegations.
In 2017, AAP leader Sanjay Singh wrongly accused a BJP youth member, Ankit Bhardwaj, of attacking fellow AAP member Kapil Mishra. It turned out to be a case of mistaken identity, and Singh was compelled to issue a public apology.
Even Digvijaya Singh, known for his controversial statements, faced legal action in 2023 for defamatory remarks about RSS ideologue M.S. Golwalkar. A court in 2024 ordered him to issue a formal apology—yet another example of a political leader walking back his words under legal pressure.
The Pattern Is Clear, and So Are the Consequences
Across all these cases, a common thread emerges: bold, inflammatory statements made without credible evidence, followed by legal battles, courtroom apologies, and damaged reputations.
These repeated episodes also cast a shadow on Rahul Gandhi’s 2014 claim that “Gandhis don’t apologise.” Reality has proven otherwise, as legal accountability and political backlash continue to force retractions and apologies from key opposition figures.
Saket Gokhale’s recent apology encapsulates a deeper issue in Indian politics—a culture of unverified claims, sensational rhetoric, and headline-grabbing allegations that ultimately crumble under legal scrutiny. The larger question remains: how much longer will the public tolerate this cycle of baseless accusations followed by reluctant apologies?
As trust in political discourse continues to erode, perhaps it’s time for leaders to rethink their approach—from courtroom apologies to responsible politics.