In a back-to-back setback for Rahul Gandhi, the high court rejected a plea seeking a stay on the conviction and sentencing in a 2019 defamation case stating that the conviction would not result in injustice to the accused.
—
TODAY, the Gujarat High Court’s Justice Hemant Prachchhak denied the stay on the conviction and suspension of the sentence of Indian National Congress leader, Rahul Gandhi in a 2019 defamation case.
According to the court, there were no reasonable grounds to stay his conviction.
On March 23, Gandhi was convicted under Sections 499 (defamation) and 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code by H.H. Verma, a chief judicial magistrate in Surat.
He was sentenced to two years, which is the maximum punishment for defamation, for the imputation, “How are the names of all these thieves Modi, Modi, Modi— Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, Narendra Modi— and if you search a little, more Modis will spill out?”, made during a rally in Kolar, Karnataka during the 2019 Lok Sabha election campaign.
The conviction was based on a defamation complaint filed by Gujarat legislator Purnesh Modi.
Subsequently, the conviction led to his disqualification as a member of the Parliament Lok Sabha under Section 8(3) (disqualification on conviction for certain offences) of the Representation of People Act, 1951.
As per Section 8(3) of the 1951 Act, a person convicted for an offence and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for “not less than two years” stands disqualified from the date of conviction.
The high court today remarked that the plea of Gandhi requesting a stay on his conviction was based on “absolutely non-existent ground”. It further stated that as many as 10 criminal cases are pending against him including a defamation complaint filed by the grandson of V.D. Savarkar, Satyaki Savarkar.
The sessions court in Surat granted Gandhi interim bail on April 3 and his sentence was suspended until the final disposal of the appeal. However, this application seeking a stay on the convicting and sentencing was eventually dismissed.
Subsequently, he filed an appeal in the high court on April 25.
