The court also noted that the petitioner had not disclosed certain material facts, while seeking the ex-parte relief.A district court in Chandigarh on Friday lifted “interim restraint” on retired judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Justice Ranjit Singh, which had prohibited him from publishing or sharing material related to an alleged Rs 5-crore bribery demand, observing that a person approaching the court must come with “clean hands”.On September 8, the court had restrained Justice Ranjit Singh, who heads the Punjab Human Rights Organisation (PHRO), SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia, and Congress MLA Sukhpal Singh Khaira from publishing, circulating, or making any “unverified defamatory content” over an alleged bribe demand by Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Singh Mann’s wife Gurpreet Kaur to secure the release of an accused in a rape case.Civil Judge (Junior Division) Dr Prikshit of Chandigarh District Court had passed the order on a suit filed by Gurpreet Kaur on September 8 after the retired High Court judge — in a TV programme — and others made comments about the alleged Rs 5 crore bribe demand by Kaur. Gurpreet Kaur had alleged that Justice Singh, Majithia and Khaira made baseless and defamatory allegations against her and circulated them on social media, damaging her reputation.Justice Singh subsequently challenged the order, arguing that the complete context of his remarks had not been placed before the court.Challenging the order, Justice Singh’s counsel Charanjit Singh Bakshi told the court that Justice Singh had not independently made any allegation against Gurpreet Kaur at the press conference, and that he had only referred to allegations contained in proceedings before the High Court.The counsel placed before the court the complete video of a press conference held on August 20, along with a relevant Punjab and Haryana High Court order.After watching the complete press conference, the court found that Justice Singh was not claiming personal knowledge of any alleged demand of Rs 5 crore, and was rather referring to allegations made in a petition pending before the High Court.Story continues below this adThe court, thus, observed that Justice Singh, as the chairman of a human rights organisation, was dealing with an issue concerning alleged human rights violations and referring to the matter in that context.The court also noted that the petitioner had not disclosed certain material facts, while seeking the ex-parte relief. “A petitioner, who conceals important facts from the court, cannot question the conduct of another person, the court observed.The Rs 5 crore bribery allegation stems from an alleged abduction and rape case in Amritsar, in which the survivour’s father approached the High Court, alleging that attempts were being made to get the FIR cancelled.The High Court’s July 20 order recorded allegations in pleadings that “a person allegedly close to Gurpreet Kaur was involved and that a demand of Rs 4-5 crore had been made for securing cancellation of the FIR”. Gurpreet Kaur, however, denied the allegations as false and defamatory.Story continues below this adJustice Singh later referred to these allegations at a press conference, making it clear that he was referring to what had been stated in the High Court pleadings and was not making the allegation from his personal knowledge.While transferring the investigation to a senior police officer, The High Court specifically said it was not determining the truth of the allegations at that stage.