The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the conviction of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case for his ‘Modi’ surname remark allegedly made in a political rally in 2019.

A three-judge Bench headed by Justice BR Gavai pointed out that the Gujarat trial judge, other than severely admonishing Gandhi for his alleged remarks, failed to give even a single reason for serving the Congress leader with the maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment.

The court said the Magistrate had insisted on handing the Congress leader the severest punishment when the penal code allowed a choice between imprisonment and fine or both.

‘Lack of reasons for punishment’

The Gujarat High Court too, the apex court Bench said, while waxing eloquent about the various aspects of the case in a “voluminous” 120-page judgment had somehow skipped addressing the issue of complete lack of reasons for giving Gandhi the maximum punishment.

The apex court said Gandhi was disqualified as MP from the Parliament for a total of eight years under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act solely due to the two-year sentence.

“Had the duration of the sentence been a day less, provisions of the Act would not have been attracted… The judge is expected to give reasons for imposing maximum sentence, particularly when the offence is non-cognisable, bailable and compoundable,” Justice Gavai observed.

The Bench, also comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Sanjay Kumar, noted that “disqualification not only affects the rights of the individual but also that of the electorate he represents in the Parliament… the ramifications are wide”.

“Is it not a factor that an entire constituency which elects a person will go unrepresented?” Justice Gavai asked.

Senior advocate AM Singhvi and advocate Prasanna S, for Gandhi, said the courts below had condemned the Congress leader to silence for eight years.

‘Mutual respect needed’

“There is room for dissent in democracy. There should be mutual respect in politics,” Singhvi said.

But the apex court said Gandhi’s alleged remarks, if made, were “not in good taste”.

“A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of caution while making public speeches… The petitioner (Gandhi) ought to have been more careful,” the apex court observed.

The court reminded Gandhi of how it had advised him to be more careful in future with his public utterances while accepting his apology for his “chor” remarks during the previous general elections.

During the hearing, Singhvi submitted that he had not seen any other defamation case in which a maximum two-year sentence had been awarded to an accused.

He said there had been no reason for the Gujarat High Court to reject the plea by Gandhi to stay the conviction.

He said the case did not entail heinous offences like rape, kidnap or murder, which involves moral turpitude. Singhvi said Mr. Gandhi stood convicted of defaming an “amorphous group”.

Gandhi had already missed two Parliament sessions. A list of cases filed against him show they were all by BJP “karyakartas”, Singhvi argued.

He debunked submissions that Gandhi had criminal antecedents.

Senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, for defamation complainant and Gujarat BJP MLA Purnesh Modi, argued that there were official witnesses, tapes and recordings of Gandhi’s comments. He said the electronic evidence showed a “clear intent” to defame an entire community of people with the ‘Modi’ surname because of his hatred for Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

When asked in court, Gandhi had maintained that he did not remember his remark.

“How many politicians remember their speeches… They make at least 10 a day,” Justice Gavai remarked.

Related Topics