Mahua Moitra Vs Lawyer Jai Dehadrai Over Pet Dog Henry: Delhi HC Asks 'Why Don't You Sit Together And Sort It Out?'

(MENAFN- Live Mint) The long-running custody battle between lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai and Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra over their pet Rottweiler named Henry has reached the Delhi High Court, with Dehadrai challenging a trial court order that barred him from publicly discussing the case, Bar and Bench reported.

On Wednesday, 3 September, Justice Manoj Jain issued notice to Mahua Moitra, seeking her response to Dehadrai's petition . The court also suggested that the parties attempt to amicably resolve the dispute outside the courtroom.

Also Read | TMC's Mahua Moitra gets breather: Lawyer says can withdraw defamation suit if...

“Why don't you sit together and sort it out? What relief is she seeking in the suit?” Bar and Bench quoted Justice Jain asked during the hearing.

The matter will be heard next on December 22, after TMC MP Moitra failed to appear despite being served advance notice.

Why did Dehadrai approach the Delhi High Court?

Dehadrai is contesting a March 2025 order by a Saket trial court that restrained both parties from making any public statements about the ongoing legal proceedings.

The trial court's ex-parte order came after Mahua Moitra filed a suit seeking shared custody of the dog, Henry . Jay Anant Dehadrai argues that the sweeping gag order violates his constitutional right to freedom of speech.

Also Read | Delhi HC summons Mahua Moitra in defamation case filed by SC lawyer Dehadrai

“A frivolous case is filed against me, and I can't talk about it, I can't discuss it, I can't write about it? Where is it necessary to the fairness of the trial? She is an MP. Can an MP claim a higher right over a normal plaintiff and say any case I file will be gagged?” argued Senior Advocate Sanjay Ghose, appearing for Dehadrai, according to Bar and Bench report.

According to Dehadrai's plea, the gag order even prevents him from acknowledging the existence of Henry's custody case with Mahua Moitra in the public domain.

What triggered the gag order?

Jay Anant Dehadrai had previously posted a statement on social media platform X (formerly Twitter) about the dispute, without revealing any case details.

However, the trial court viewed the post as a violation of its March order and issued a further ex-parte interim injunction, directing him to remove the post and refrain from publishing any further remarks.

Also Read | Delhi HC scraps Mahua Moitra's plea in cash for query case

Dehadrai said he complied with the order by taking down the post, but he did so“under protest.”

His legal team contends that the order was excessive and unnecessary, particularly since, as Ghose pointed out,“there was no privacy angle involved in the matter to issue a gag order.”

What arguments were made before the Delhi High Court?

Jai Anant Dehadrai's counsel relied on the Delhi High Court 's ruling in Ajay Kumar v. Union of India, which addresses limitations on gag orders and freedom of expression.

The High Court questioned why Dehadrai had earlier withdrawn his application before the trial court instead of pursuing it to challenge the order directly.

Also Read | Dehadrai raises concerns over Mahua Moitra's 'unannounced' visits to his house

“If you are covered by this judgment, that gag order should not have been passed. Then why did you withdraw (your) application (filed earlier before the trial court against its March 2025 order)?” Justice Jain asked.

Ghose clarified that the trial court had orally advised Dehadrai to withdraw the application, suggesting that an appeal before the High Court was the appropriate legal remedy.

Also Read | Mahua Moitra seeks to 'cross-examine' ex Jai Dehadrai, Darshan Hiranandani What's next in the Henry custody case?

The Delhi High Court will hear the case again on December 22, when it will consider TMC MP Mahua Moitra 's response.

For now, the Delhi High Court has not lifted the trial court's gag order, meaning both parties remain barred from making any public statements about the case.

Dehadrai's petition was drafted by advocate Gaurav Sarkar.

MENAFN03092025007365015876ID1110011680