Nithyakalyani Narayanan. V
Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in a defamation case over his ‘Modi surname’ remark was put on hold by the Supreme Court on August 4th. The court held that although his remarks were not in good taste, disqualifying him from the Parliament would affect his constituents.
The three-judge bench of Justice BR Gavai, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice Sanjay Kumar pointed out that if the previous sentence of two years directed by the trial judge was a day lesser, it would not have attracted disqualification as an MP.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the former MP’s counsel, argued that this was Mr Gandhi’s last chance before acquittal, which will allow him to attend the Parliament and contest elections. He specified that the Gujarat High Court had reserved its judgement for 66 days and that he has already missed out on two Parliament sessions due to conviction in the case.
Advocate Singhvi said this is the first time 30 crore people have held to be an identifiable class – “They are amorphous, non-homogenous…communities, castes, and groups with appellation ‘Modi’ are totally different.”
When Justice Gavai began the hearing by saying that Rahul Gandhi will have to make an exceptional case for a stay on conviction, Advocate Singhvi replied that he was not arguing for conviction today.
He also contended that the complainant Purnesh Modi’s original surname is not Modi and that he belonged to Modh Vanika Samaj. He pointed out that not a single of the persons Mr Gandhi had named during his speech had sued him – “Interestingly, everybody who is aggrieved in this very ‘small’ community of 13 crores, the only people suing are BJP office-holders. Very strange.”
The Supreme Court pointed out that the trial court has also discussed the former Wayanad MP’s criminal antecedents. Advocate Abhishek Singhvi responded- “They have cited 13 cases but no conviction in any of those cases. How are these cited for criminal antecedents? I am not a hardened criminal…No conviction despite…look at the chart. Full of cases filed by BJP karyakartas, but never any conviction.”
The counsel explained that the High Court treats the case as a serious offence involving moral turpitude, although this case is non-cognisable, bailable, and compoundable and it is not against society, not kidnapping, rape or murder. He emphasised that there’s no other case where two years sentence has been given.
Mr. Gandhi had requested the top court to stay his two-year conviction and let him participate in the ongoing Lok Sabha sittings and sessions thereafter.