A Surat sessions court on Thursday rejected Congress leader Rahul Gandh’s plea to suspend his conviction in a criminal defamation case for comments made four years ago on the Modi surname, dealing a blow to his hopes of quickly reversing his disqualification as a Member of Parliament (MP).
Additional sessions judge Robin P Mogera 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. He cited prima facie evidence and observations of the trial court and said it appeared Gandhi made certain derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi apart from comparing the people with the same surname with thieves.
“...the appellant was not an ordinary person and was sitting MP, connected with public life. Any word spoken by appellant would have large impact in mind of common public...Moreover, high standard of morality is expected from a person like appellant and the learned trial court had inflicted sentence which was permissible in law,” said the 27-page judgment.
“I am of the opinion that the appellant has not made out any case to suspend the conviction recorded against him,” the judge added.
{{/usCountry}}“I am of the opinion that the appellant has not made out any case to suspend the conviction recorded against him,” the judge added.
{{/usCountry}}The Congress called the decision unsustainable and erroneous. “The conviction has been upheld contrary to all basic elementary principles of law...let me assure you that the judgement will be challenged in accordance with law in the very near future,” senior leader Abhishek Singhvi told reporters in Delhi.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said it was a victory of the people and the judiciary. “Surat court rejecting Rahul Gandhi’s plea once again proved that the Congress dynast intentionally insulted the OBC community of India,” said Union minister Anurag Thakur.
On March 23, a Surat court convicted Gandhi for criminal defamation and sentenced him to two years in prison for a remark he made ahead of the 2019 national polls about the Modi surname. Under the law, the conviction and two-year jail term rendered Gandhi unfit to enter either House of Parliament for a period of eight years. The next day, the former Wayanad member of Parliament (MP) was disqualified from the Lok Sabha, sparking a political storm and a rare moment of Opposition unity in Parliament.
Any elected representative who is sentenced for any offence for a period of two years or more faces immediate disqualification under the Representation of People Act, 1951 (RP Act). One provision of the Act that granted three months’ protection from disqualification was struck down in 2013 as “ultra vires” by the Supreme Court.
In 2019 at a rally in Karnataka, Gandhi asked the crowd, “How come all the thieves have Modi as the common surname?” referring to fugitives Lalit Modi and Nirav Modi, and targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In 2019, former Gujarat minister Purnesh Modi filed a case against Gandhi in Surat, saying the opposition leader had insulted all members of the Modi community.
In his verdict, sessions court judge Mogera said Gandhi needed to argue there was a rare and exceptional case , special and compelling circumstances, irreversible consequences leading to injustice and irretrievable damages, and prove there were no criminal antecedents or a prima-facie case on merits.
The judge found against Gandhi on five counts.
One, Gandhi’s advocates argued that the complaint was not maintainable because there was no definite or identifiable group in the case. But the court disagreed.
“Looking to prima facie evidence and observations...it transpires that the appellant had made certain derogatory remarks against the Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi in general public and further compared the persons having ‘Modi’ surname with thieves and the complainant is also having surname of Modi. Moreover, the complainant is ex-minister and involved in public life and such defamatory remarks would have certainly harmed his reputation and caused him pain and agony in society,” the order said.
Two, Gandhi’s lawyers argued that he didn’t receive a fair trial, the lack of jurisdiction, and that the trial court was unduly harsh.
But the court said that the lower court gave thoughtful consideration to the complaint, verification and documents produced, and issued the summons, which were never challenged by Gandhi, and therefore the lack of territorial jurisdiction could not be accepted at this stage.
“So far as imposing of maximum punishment is concerned, it would be worthwhile to observe that the appellant was not an ordinary person and was sitting MP, connected with public life. Any word spoken by appellant would have large impact in mind of common public. The alleged speech given by appellant on 13/4/2019 was during election,” the court said.
Three, the court said Gandhi failed to show that there was a prima facie case in his favour. Judge Mogera said given his stature, Gandhi should have been more careful with his words, which would have large impact on the mind of people. “Any defamatory words coming from the mouth of appellant are sufficient enough to cause mental agony to aggrieved person. In this case, by uttering defamatory words viz. comparing persons having surname ‘Modi’ with thieves would definitely have caused mental agony and harm the reputation of complainant, who is socially active and dealing in public.
Four, Mogera said Gandhi’s lawyers failed in demonstrating that by not staying the conviction and denying an opportunity to contest the election on account of disqualification, irreversible and irrevocable damage is likely to be caused to the Congress leader.
“Considering the juxtaposition of law with regard to considering criteria of disqualification as enumerated in Section 8(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1951, I hold, based on the above discussion, that removal or disqualification as Member of Parliament cannot be termed as irreversible or irreparable loss or damage,” the order said.
Five, the judge cited Supreme Court pronouncements that the power to suspend/stay the conviction is required to be exercised with caution and circumspection. “...if such power is exercised in a casual and mechanical manner, the same would have [a] serious impact on the public perception on the justice delivery systems and such order will shake public confidence in [the] judiciary,” Mogera said. “Hence, I am of the opinion that the appellant has not made out any case to suspend the conviction recorded against him.”
The developments come amid a prolonged election season, where at least five states will go to the polls this year, leading up to the general elections next year. The Wayanad seat continues to remain vacant.
“We will continue to avail all options still available to us under the law, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said on Twitter earlier in the day.
BJP leader Amit Malviya hit out at Gandhi and said on Twitter, “Despite having insulted the OBC community, calling them all ‘chor’ (thief), Rahul, shamefully remains defiant... His arrogant attitude reeks of entitlement.”
BJP national spokesperson Sambit Patra said at a press conference in New Delhi that the court’s decision is “a blow” to the arrogance of the Gandhi family, “especially Rahul Gandhi.”
“It’s a slap on Gandhi family’s arrogance...Gandhi family had thought that they can get away after abusing backward classes. But that did not happen,” Patra claimed.
“Today is the black day in the democracy of India as the main Opposition leader is being treated like this. BJP wants to make India a Banana Republic,” Jammu and Kashmir People’s Democratic Party (JKPDP) chief Mehbooba Mufti told the media.