Supreme Court Stays Conviction Of Congress Leader Rahul Gandhi In 'Modi-Thieves' Defamation Case Which Disqualified Him As MP

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the conviction of Congress leader and former Member of Parliament (MP) Rahul Gandhi in the criminal defamation case over the "why all thieves have Modi surname" remark. With the stay of his conviction, Rahul Gandhi's disqualification as MP also now remains in abeyance.The Court observed in the order as follows :"The sentence for an offence punishable under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code is maximum of two years of sentence or fine or both. The learned trial judge, in the order passed by him, has awarded the maximum sentence of two years. Except the admonition to the petitioner by this Court in a contempt proceeding, no other reason has been granted by the learned trial judge while imposing the maximum sentence of two years. It is to be noted that it is only on account of the maximum sentence of two years imposed by the learned trial judge that the provisions of Section 8(3) of the Representation of Peoples Act came into play. Had the sentence been a day lesser, then the provisions would not have been attracted.Particularly when the offence was non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable, the least which was expected from the learned trial judge was to give reasons for imposing the maximum punishment. Though the learned appellate court and the High Court have spent voluminous pages in rejecting the applications, these aspects are not seen considered".At the same time, the bench observed that the utterances of Rahul Gandhi were not in "good taste" and said that a person in public life ought to have been more careful while making public speeches.Considering the wide ramifications of the Section 8(3) affecting not only the right of the petitioner but also the rights of the electorate which elected him in the constituency and also the fact that no reason has been assigned by the trial court to award the maximum sentence, the bench said that it is staying the conviction. The bench refrained from making any observations on the merits of the matter considering the pendency of the appeal.A three-judge bench of Justices BR Gavai, PS Narasimha, and Sanjay Kumar was hearing Gandhi’s plea challenging the Gujarat High Court's refusal to stay his conviction in a criminal defamation case over 'Modi thieves' remark, which resulted in his disqualification from the Lok Sabha. The apex court issued notice in the Congress leader’s plea last month, on July 21.Arguments of GandhiSenior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, at the outset submitted that the complainant Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Purnesh Modi belonged to the Modh Vanika Samaj which includes other communities as well. The records indicate that the Modi surname falls under many other castes.He pointed out that of the 13 crore members said to be in the Modi community, only a handful of BJP members have filed complaints alleging criminal defamation. He argued that the class of persons sharing Modi surname is not an identifiable class within the meaning of Section 499/500 IPC who can file a defamation complaint.Singhvi then highlighted that the Court awarding the maximum sentence of two years for criminal defamation is an extreme rarity."I am yet to see a non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable offence, which is not against society, which is not kidnapping, rape and murder, in which the maximum sentence is given. How can this become an offence involving moral turpitude?", Singhvi stated. He contended that the maximum sentence has the effect of silencing Gandhi for eight years, as it will disqualify him from elections as per the Representation of the People Act."The learned judge also talks about your criminal antecedents", Justice Gavai asked. Singhvi replied that there is no prior conviction for Gandhi. There was one contempt case in Supreme Court in which he tendered an apology. Other cases are pending complaints filed by BJP workers."He is not a hardened criminal. There is no conviction in any case", Singhvi stated. "There has to be some mutual respect in politics. I am not a criminal", he emphasised. He also underscored that the High Court passed the order 66 days after reserving the judgment.Singhvi then stated that the consequence of the conviction is that a bye-election will have to be notified for the Wayanad constituency. "I have already lost two sessions (of Lok Sabha). If the Supreme Court says no, I will lose the entire term", he said. The senior counsel also asked what is the complainant's interest in ensuring his disqualification as his concern ought to be only the conviction.He also questioned the evidence in the case. The complainant has not heard the speech first hand and his source of information is a WhatsApp message and a newspaper article. The complainant has not proved the speech. He pointed out that the complainant himself had approached the High Court to stay the trial saying that he wanted to get evidence. One year later, he himself gets the stay vacated and a month later, the...

Supreme Court Stays Conviction Of Congress Leader Rahul Gandhi In 'Modi-Thieves' Defamation Case Which Disqualified Him As MP

Awstika Das

Tags