E-Paper
Supreme Court to hear Rahul Gandhi’s appeal in defamation case on July 21
The Gujarat high court refused to put on hold Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s conviction and a two-year jail term in the criminal defamation case.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear on July 21 an appeal filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, challenging the Gujarat high court order that refused to put on hold his conviction and a two-year jail term in a criminal defamation case.
Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud assigned the date of hearing to Gandhi’s appeal after senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi mentioned the matter, seeking an early hearing.
The appeal was filed on July 15, exactly a week after the high court dealt a blow to Gandhi’s endeavour to revive his Lok Sabha membership, ruling that the Congress leader “breached modesty” and that his offence involved “moral turpitude”.
Also Read | ‘Staying at PM house without wife wrong’: Lalu on 'get married' advice to Rahul Gandhi
In his appael, Gandhi urged the top court to immediately stay his conviction to enable him to regain his MP status, arguing the conviction order would lead to throttling of free speech, free expression, free thought, and free statement.
“It would contribute to the systematic, repetitive emasculation of democratic institutions and the consequent strangulation of democracy which would be gravely detrimental to the political climate and future of India,” he said.
Gandhi’s petition complained that a political speech in the course of democratic political activity, critical of economic offenders, and also of Narendra Modi, has been held to be an act of moral turpitude inviting the harshest punishment.
“Such a finding is gravely detrimental to democratic free speech in the midst of a political campaign. It is respectfully submitted that the same will set a disastrous precedent wiping out any form of political dialogue or debate which is remotely critical in any manner,” it said.
The complainant in the case, BJP leader Purnesh Modi, has filed his caveat in the top court to ensure no orders are passed in Gandhi’s appeal without hearing his side.
On March 23, a Gujarat magisterial court convicted Gandhi for his remarks on the Modi surname after Purnesh Modi filed a criminal complaint. The Congress leader was sentenced to two-year imprisonment, which disqualified him as an MP under the Representation of People Act. Gandhi was declared disqualified as MP from Kerala’s Wayanad on March 24, following notification of the Lok Sabha Secretariat.
Gandhi approached the sessions court, which rejected his plea for a stay on his conviction on April 20, compelling him to approach the high court. The April 20 order cited Gandhi’s stature as an MP and former chief of the country’s second-largest political party and said he should have been more careful in his comments.
On July 7, the high court affirmed this order, rejecting Gandhi’s criminal revision application seeking a stay on his conviction.
“The present conviction is a serious matter affecting a large segment of society and needs to be viewed by this court with the gravity and significance it commands... It is now the need of the hour to have purity in politics. Representatives of people should be men of clear antecedent,” said justice Hemant P Prachchhak in his judgment.
The high court judgment meant that Gandhi’s disqualification from the Lok Sabha will continue. While Gandhi cannot be arrested since his jail term remains suspended for now. Only a stay on his conviction by the Supreme Court or a favourable judgment in his appeal by a sessions court can enable him to contest next year’s Lok Sabha elections.
Under the law, the conviction and two-year jail term renders Gandhi unfit to enter either House of Parliament for eight years. But this can be reversed if he can get the conviction overturned or suspended by a higher court.
Gandhi’s legal team has to now get at least a stay on the conviction in the next 10 months to allow the former Congress chief to contest the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
In his appeal to the top court, Gandhi contended that the entire approach of the judgements by the high court and the courts below has been to mischaracterise his one-line statement as hugely serious.
“This has resulted in the inexorable exclusion of the petitioner from all political elective office for a long period of 8 years. That too in the world’s largest democracy where the Petitioner has been a former President of the oldest political movement in the country and is also continuously in the vanguard of opposition political activity,” the appeal added.
If political satire were to be held to be a base motive, Gandhi said, any political speech which is colourfully critical of the government, or any other political party or involves a turn of phrase in the course of a vigorous political speech, would become an act of moral turpitude. “This would completely corrode the foundations of democracy,” the plea said. “To equate a political speech criticising the government or a section of society, even if defamatory, to the aforesaid, sets a completely incongruous standard unknown to jurisprudence which deals with moral turpitude.”Al
