Supreme Court notice to complainant Purnesh Modi on Rahul Gandhi defamation case
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the complainant on a plea by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi challenging the Gujarat High Court's order declining to stay his conviction in a defamation case for his 2019 remarks on the Modi surname.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra sought a response from BJP MLA Purnesh Modi, whose complaint led to the conviction and maximum sentence of two years for Gandhi.
At the beginning of the hearing, Justice Gavai said his father was associated with Congress for 40 years and his brother is in Congress.
He asked the parties if they wanted him to hear the appeal.
Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, said he has no problem with it, similarly counsel for respondents said they also had no issue with justice Gavai hearing the matter.
In his arguments, Singhvi said that Gandhi has suffered for 111 days, lost one Parliament session, and is now losing another session due to his disqualification.
Singhvi said that elections to the parliament constituency of Wayanad could be announced soon.
The bench said that it had to hear both parties as the Gujarat High Court's order was a detailed one.
Singhvi then asked the court to give a short date to hear the matter.
The court fixed the matter for further hearing on August 4.
In his special leave petition, Gandhi challenged the Gujarat High Court's July 7 decision declining his plea for stay on the conviction relying upon "extraneous and irrelevant factors" like pendency of similar cases against him.
Justifying his 2019 statement, Gandhi said he has the right to criticise and comment upon the measures undertaken by the Prime Minister, who is his political opponent, and merely because he was critical or he had a different opinion, the complaint for defamation can’t be sustained against him.
A single bench of Justice Hemant Prachchhak in the HC had said that in view of Gandhi's conduct and other pending cases against him, the conviction in the present case would not do any injustice to him.
The court also pointed out that it is a well-settled law that stay on conviction is not a rule, but rather an exception.
"Moreover, as many as 10 criminal cases are pending against the applicant. It is now the need of the hour to have purity in politics...After the complaint in the present case, another complaint was filed at Pune by the grandson of Veer Savarkar against the applicant," the bench had said.
Read |
On March 23, 2023, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat had held Gandhi guilty for the offence of defamation and awarded him maximum two-year jail term on the complaint by Purnesh Modi.
Gandhi had stated that this loss is irreparable and the issue may also be looked at from the point of view of the electorate as even the subsequent acquittal of the petitioner cannot undo the damage.
He also contended that a political speech criticising the government or a section of society, even if defamatory, cannot be equated with moral turpitude.
He also claimed if the conviction is not stayed, it would lead to throttling of free speech, expression, thought, and statement.