On April 20, the Surat Sessions Court dismissed Congress leader and former MP Rahul Gandhi’s application seeking a stay on conviction in the Modi Surname Defamation Case for his remark “why all thieves share the Modi surname” during his political campaign for 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
It is pertinent to note that the restoration of Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha membership was subject to suspension of his conviction and issuance of notification from the Lok Sabha Secretariat for the same.
The former Congress MP challenged his conviction before the Surat Sessions Court along with two applications accompanied with his appeal, one for suspension of his sentence and the other for suspension of his conviction. Thereafter, the Additional Sessions Judge at Surat, Robin P Mogera, suspended the sentence imposed against Rahul Gandhi on April 3 and granted him bail pending hearing of his appeal.
Rahul Gandhi’s counsel argued that the complainant BJP leader Purnesh Modi cannot be termed as an ‘aggrieved person’ and hence was not authorized to file the complaint. Furthermore, the counsel argued concept of expression ‘Modi’ being an association of persons becomes entirely unacceptable. Rahul Gandhi’s counsel also submitted that the complaint was filed with a political motive.
The complainant’s counsel argued that Rahul Gandhi had the knowledge that his remarks would harm the reputation of ‘Modi’ surname holders and such statements were made only with a view to earn political gain.
The Court rejected Rahul Gandhi’s counsel’s arguments and held that the complainant’s complaint was maintainable as he is an “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.”
Furthermore, the Court noted, “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.”
“Moreover, high standard of morality is expected from a person like Appellant and the Ld. Trial Court had inflicted sentence, which was permissible in law. Further, it appears from record that all opportunities were accorded to Appellant for cross-examining the witnesses and hence I do not agree with the contentions of Ld. Senior Advocate Mr. Cheema about appellant being deprived of fair trial,” the Court added.
The Court said, “It is not disputed fact that the Appellant was the Member of Parliament and President of the second largest political party and looking to such stature of Appellant he 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,” the Court added.
The Court held, “removal or disqualification as Member of Parliament cannot be termed as irreversible or irreparable loss or damage to the Appellant, as envisaged by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Naranbhai Bhikhabhai Kachhadia’s case.”
Therefore, the Court dismissed Rahul Gandhi’s application seeking a stay on conviction. The Court concluded, “An application Exh.5 – preferred by Appellant Mr. Rahul Gandhi u/s.389 and 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for staying the conviction imposed by the judgment and order dated 23/3/2023 by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case No.18712/2019 is hereby dismissed.”
Rahul Gandhi’s Disqualification
On March 23, a Surat Court convicted Rahul Gandhi in the Modi Surname Defamation Case and sentenced him to two years imprisonment over his remark wherein he repeatedly asked, “Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, Narendra Modi. How come they all have Modi as common surname? How come all the thieves have Modi as common surname?” during his political campaign for 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
The Lok Sabha Secretariat issued the notification of Rahul Gandhi’s disqualification on March 24. It is pertinent to note that u/s 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, “a person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for no less than two years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a period of six years since his release.” The provision provides for automatic disqualification of an MP, MLA or MLC from the date of conviction when a such elected representative is convicted for not less than two years.
Rahul Gandhi tearing the UPA’s Ordinance
In 2013, the Congress-led UPA Government introduced the Representation of the People (Second Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013 in an attempt to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Section 8(4) of the Act deferred a sentenced representative’s conviction by 3 months to allow them to appeal before a higher court and prevent disqualification. The UPA Government’s amendment proposed that the convicted representatives would not be disqualified immediately after conviction.
On September 24, 2013, the UPA Government attempted to bring the amendment into effect as an Ordinance before the verdict in Congress ally and RJD supremo Lalu Yadav’s fodder scam case. However, Rahul Gandhi called the Ordinance “complete nonsense that should be torn up and thrown away,” and tore the Ordinance during the press conference. Thereafter, the UPA Government withdrew the Ordinance and the Bill.
In October 2013, Lalu Yadav was disqualified from the Lok Sabha and barred from contesting elections for 11 years which included his 5-year imprisonment and 6-year bar subsequent to his release under the Act.
Former Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad’s resignation letter claimed that “Rahul Gandhi demolished the entire consultative mechanism of the Congress after he entered politics, particularly after he was made the party vice president by Sonia Gandhi,” referring to Rahul Gandhi’s tearing the Ordinance during a press conference.
