IPA Newspack
  • Home
  • now
  • politics
  • business
  • markets

IPA /

IPA Special

IPA Special

There Are Ten Valid Reasons To Appeal Against Rahul Gandhi’s Conviction

By Satyaki Chakraborty

There are at least ten valid legal reasons for challenging the conviction of the Congress leader Rahul Gandhi by the Surat Court as a consequence of which the Wayanad member of Lok Sabha was disqualified by the Lok Sabha secretariat on March 23 this year. The former MP’s lawyer Kirit Panwala is filing the appeal against the conviction on the basis of those reasons shortly, according to The Leaflet.

On March 23, H.H. Verma, a chief judicial magistrate in Surat, pronounced the judgment sentencing Gandhi to two years of imprisonment under Sections 499 (defamation) and 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the maximum punishment under these Sections, and the minimum needed under Section 8(3) (disqualification on conviction for certain offences) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, to disqualify a member from the Parliament.

A day later, Gandhi was promptly disqualified from the Parliament, putting a spanner in the works of his recent political resurgence via the Bharat Jodo Yatra and the fiery speeches in the Lok Sabha, in which he questioned the nexus between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and billionaire industrialist Gautam Adani. The conviction and the consequent disqualification of the membership has united all the opposition parties against the Narendra Modi Government and the BJP. Already fourteen major p opposition parties have sent a petition to the Supreme Court seeking the intervention of the apex judicial body to the blatant use of the central agencies by the Modi government a against the opposition leaders in the interests of the ruling party. The Supreme Court is set to hear the petition on April 5.

Rahul’s lawyer Mr. Panwala has already listed ten reasons citing which he will seek stay on the conviction of Rahul Gandhi which includes two years in jail. The CJM allowed Rahul Gandhi to appeal against the conviction within a month. Accordingly, the Rahul lawyer is filing the appeal within the stipulated period- by April 22 this year. The immediate fate of the conviction depends on the decision of the Surat court on this appeal but if it is not stayed, Rahul Gandhi can approach higher court also for relief.

According to Mr. Panwala, almost 90 per cent of Gandhi’s supposedly defamatory allegations were against Prime Minister Modi. The defamation case could have only been filed by the person aggrieved by the offence, that is, Narendra Modi; the complainant, Gujarat legislator Purnesh Modi had no right to file a criminal complaint for the concerned imputation. Thus, the complaint is not maintainable under Section 199(1)(prosecution for defamation) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Further, even for the single imputation, Purnesh Modi cannot be considered as the aggrieved person because it does not concern him personally; it is against all ‘Modis’.

The Surat court convicted Gandhi for his remarks under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC. He was sentenced to simple imprisonment for two years. This is the maximum punishment that could have been awarded by the court. Even in the gravest cases of defamation, the court does not ordinarily inflict such harsh punishment. Such punishment could certainly not be inflicted for a single imputation, which was not even elaborated upon.

Rahul’s lawyer’s point, according to The Leaflet is that the award of such disproportionate punishment gives the impression that it was only to set in motion Gandhi’s disqualification as a Member of Parliament, as two years is the minimum quantum of punishment to attract disqualification from the Parliament under the Representation of People Act, 1951. Mere imposition of a fine would have met the ends of justice in Gandhi’s case.

Further, it is not the case that a person cannot file a complaint on behalf of a collection of persons. But that collection of persons should be a ‘well-defined group’ that is definite and determinate, and can be distinguished from the rest of the community. There are many precedents of the Supreme Court and high courts to support this argument.

A defamatory comment against lawyers as a whole or against a community as a whole does not give the members of that community the right to file a defamation complaint, unless the alleged comment is directed, for instance, towards an identifiable group of lawyers such as the lawyers of the Surat Bar Association. The complaint’s alleged argument that there are 13 crore Modis and the imputation is directed towards all of them does not stand. It is because those 13 crore individuals are not a well-defined identifiable group.

Another important argument is that there is no ‘Modi community’ because there is no specific group of persons having the Modi surname. Modis are spread across many communities. Moreover, the complainant belongs to Modh Ganchi or Modh Vanik’s caste. There is no evidence to suggest that he is part of that community.

There appears to be no intention or knowledge to cause harm to the reputation of the so-called class of Modis or to the complainant himself. Gandhi spoke the alleged statement while comparing Narendra Modi with the fugitive businessmen Nirav Modi and Lalit Modi. His statement was clearly directed towards their common surnames. If the intention was to defame ‘Modis’ as a whole, he would have elaborated upon his alleged statement. In this scenario, mens reaas a vital ingredient of defamation is clearly missing.

Further, Rahul Gandhi resides outside the jurisdiction of the Surat court. In such cases, Section 202(postponement of issue of process) of the CrPC is applicable, where inquiry is mandatory before issuance of the process. In this inquiry, the examination of witnesses is a must. However, no inquiry was held and no witnesses were examined.

The violation of Section 202 can be raised at any stage of proceedings. The provision in this regard was added in 2005 to prevent harassment of persons residing outside the jurisdiction of the court by filing false complaints. This is a violation of the mandatory provisions of the law and it should make the trial null and void. This has been held in Deepak Gaba & Ors. versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr (2023).

As per explanation 2 of Section 499 of the IPC, an imputation made against a “company or an association or collection of persons” would amount to defamation. This is read with Section 199(1) of the CrPC, which states that no court can take cognisance of a defamation case unless the complaint is filed by “some aggrieved person”.

The surname ‘Modi’ does not refer to a specific community or caste. In Gujarat, the surname is used by Hindus, Muslims and members of the Parsi community. While some members of the Other Backward Classes use ‘Modi’ as a surname, others do not. The surname is also widely used in states like Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

In G. Narasimhan & Ors. etc. versus T.V. Chokkappa (1972), the Supreme Court examined the explanation 2 of Section 499 and held that defamation against a collection of persons can only be committed if they are an identifiable group, that is, they are determined by the definiteness as a group of particular persons, who are distinguished from the rest of the community.

In this case, an imputation had been published in The Hindu newspaper against the political party Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. The complaint was quashed on the grounds that Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam was not a definite and determinate body within the meaning of explanation 2 of Section 499 of the IPC.

In the case of Lakshadweep Parliamentarian Mohammed Faizal, who was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of ten years for an attempt to murder on January 11 and subsequently disqualified by the Lok Sabha secretariat on January 13, his qualification was restored this week , over two months after the Kerala High Court stay on his conviction. So there are enough grounds for giving stay on the conviction of the Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. (IPA Service)

 

IPA Special

Karnataka Election Results Have Given The Congress Some Useful Lessons

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

Forced Labour In India Highest In The World At Present

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

China All Set To Extend Its Solar Dominance To Global Wind Energy Sector

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

Greece Heads For Second National Elections As Coalition Talks Fail

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

Culture Wars Bubble Below The Surface Across Arab Region

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

Remembering Tina Turner, The Unapologetic Queen Of Rock And Roll

May 27, 2023
Politics

Six CMs staying away from PM’s NITI Aayog meeting

May 27, 2023
Politics

Cong poses 9 inconvenient questions to PM Modi

May 27, 2023
Politics

Cooperative federalism turned into joke, Kejriwal to Modi

May 27, 2023
Politics

BJP dares Karnataka govt to ban RSS, Bajrang Dal

May 27, 2023
Politics

Row over ‘The Diary of West Bengal’ film awaiting release

May 27, 2023
IPA Special

Opposition Politics In India Changing Fast In Next Few Months

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Approval Of MiCA Regulation Leads To A New Dawn For Cryptocurrencies In EU

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Under Nitish’s Leadership, Joint Opposition Slowly Takes Shape

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Exchange Rate Depreciation Leads To Lowering Of The Real Wages Rate

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Sourav Ganguly Has Given A Signal By Accepting Position Of BJP Govt Of Tripura

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Tina Turner Was The Ultimate Live Performer Who Mesmerised People For Decades

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

Bernie Sanders And Chicago Mayor Johnson Have Come Out In Support Of Biden As Presidential Candidate

May 26, 2023
IPA Special

‘Succession’ Is US Television’s Most Devastating Critique Of The Ultrarich

May 26, 2023
Politics

Cong stand on Delhi ordinance depends on Punjab unit

May 26, 2023

An appeal

The legacy of IPA, founded by Nikhil Chakravartty, the doyen of journalism in India, to keep the flag of independent media flying high, is facing the threat of extinction due to the effect of the Covid pandemic. Only an emergency funding can avert such an eventuality. We appeal to all those who believe in the freedom of expression to contribute to this noble cause.
Click here to learn more

Share

Reply

  • 0
More on IPA

Karnataka Election Results Have Given The Congress Some Useful Lessons

May 27, 2023 3:58 pm | IPA Staff

By Harihar Swarup What are some of the implications of the Congress’s emphasis and creditable win in Karnataka for national politics? At one level it...

IPA Special

Forced Labour In India Highest In The World At Present

May 27, 2023 3:56 pm | IPA Staff

By Dr. Gyan Pathak Forced labour in India is the highest in the world. About 11 million are presently under forced labour in the country,...

IPA Special

China All Set To Extend Its Solar Dominance To Global Wind Energy Sector

May 27, 2023 1:15 pm | IPA Staff

By K Raveendran After establishing complete dominance in global solar supply chain, China is all set to maintain a firm grip of the global wind...

IPA Special

Greece Heads For Second National Elections As Coalition Talks Fail

May 27, 2023 1:09 pm | IPA Staff

By Satyaki Chakraborty Greece is heading for another general elections next month, possibly on June 25 as the ruling National Democracy Party refused to form...

IPA Special

Karnataka Election Results Have Given The Congress Some Useful Lessons

in IPA Special
May 27, 2023   ·  

Forced Labour In India Highest In The World At Present

in IPA Special
May 27, 2023   ·  

China All Set To Extend Its Solar Dominance To Global Wind Energy Sector

in IPA Special
May 27, 2023   ·  

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow us on
Up Next: Ajit Pawar slams Shinde govt over SC hate speech remark
©2020 -2021 India Press Agency, All Rights Reserved.
Newspack by India Press Agency | Statement of Ownership | Contact Us
logo
  • Home
  • now
  • politics
  • business
  • markets