New Delhi, July 18: Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear on July 21 the appeal filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi challenging Gujarat High Court order that refused to put on hold his conviction and a two-year jail term in a criminal defamation case.
A bench of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Dr Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chadrachud, agreed to hear it on Friday, July 21.
Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior lawyer appearing for Rahul, mentioned the matter before the CJI bench, seeking hearing of the matter, and to this, the Apex Court agreed to hear his appeal on Friday, July 21.
Congress leader and disqualified Lok Sabha Member of Parliament (MP) Rahul Gandhi on July 15 knocked on the doors of the Supreme Court, challenging Gujarat High Court order dismissing his plea for stay of his conviction in the criminal defamation case over ‘Modi surname' remark.
Rahul had moved the Top Court, seeking a stay on Gujarat High Court verdict dismissing his appeal to stay his conviction in the criminal defamation case over ‘Modi surname.'
Gujarat High Court's single judge, Justice Hemant M Prachchhak, which had reserved the judgement on May 2, pronounced the verdict on July 7.
Justice Prachchhak, while pronouncing the verdict, said on July 7 that there were at least 10 criminal cases pending against Rahul Gandhi). Even after the present case, some more cases have also been filed against him. One such is filed by the grandson of Veer Savarkar. In any case, conviction would not result in any injustice. The conviction is just and proper. There is no need to interfere with the order. Therefore, the application (filed by) is dismissed.
The Gujarat HC had passed the verdict after hearing in detail the arguments and submissions from Rahul, and the complainant, Purnesh Modi.
Rahul's lawyer, senior advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, had questioned the Gujarat HC in the hearing about the locus of the complainant, Purnesh Modi in filing the complaint in the first place.
“My case is that this appeal must succeed because the law doesn't permit such complaints. Not anyone from the 13 crore people (with Modi's surname) can come and file a complaint except the ones named in the speech. It is not even their case that I named Mr. Purnesh Modi,” Dr Singhvi said.
He said that if the Election Commission declares bye-elections, then Gandhi would stand to lose his seat.
“What if the Election Commission declares dates for bye-elections? The Election Commission is not bound by anyone of us. It isn't bothered if I am arguing here or not. It will declare dates within 3 months or so. Then, even this court won't do anything, and I will lose my seat,” he submitted.
Dr Singhvi said that for an MP, such disqualification is a matter of big significance.
“Can there be something more irreversible than a disqualification that robs you of your status of being a parliamentarian or an MP? I have already missed certain parts of the last session. I have missed meetings of Parliamentary Committees, of which, he is part of,” he said, and pleaded for a stay on his conviction.
Dr Singhvi also underlined that speeches made during the election campaign should be treated with greater latitude.
On the other hand, senior Advocate Nirupam Nanavati, appearing for the complainant, Purnesh Modi, said that Gandhi was adopting double standards.
While he was saying outside court that he would not back down, his stand inside court was in contradiction to what Nanavati had said.
“In public, he says, I will speak, but in court, he has changed his stand. If you are a motormouth, you keep speaking. You are well within your right that you don't want to apologise. You are right in saying you won't apologise or say sorry. But then don't hue and cry over the consequences. Don't cry here in the courtroom like a crying baby, saying my career is at stake etc,” Nanavati had added.
Nanavati had further made it clear that the Court must consider the seriousness of the offence and its impact on the victim and society at large. He underlined that the Parliament, and not the Court or the victim, disqualified Gandhi based on a law made by the Parliament, and Gandhi could not argue that he is suffering an irreversible loss.
“I have not committed any serious offence against society; no law & order situation due to my speech,” Rahul Gandhi had told the Gujarat HC seeking stay on his conviction.
