[ad_1]
Former Congress President Rahul Gandhi took to the Supreme Court against the Gujarat High Court’s July 7 order refusing to stay his conviction. The urgent reference application will be filed on Tuesday before a judicial panel presided over by Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachod.
The Gujarat High Court, when pronouncing its verdict in the Modi family name case, declared that if the verdict is not suspended, it will stifle freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of thought and freedom of expression.
In his appeal, Gandhi said that if the Supreme Court’s ruling was not suspended, it would contribute to the systematic and repeated weakening of democratic institutions and the consequent stifling of democracy which would seriously harm the political climate and India’s future.
His appeal read: “It is respectfully stated that if the impugned judgment were not stayed, it would stifle freedom of expression, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom of expression. It would contribute to the systematic and repeated castration of democratic institutions and the consequent stifling of democracy.” Which could seriously harm the political climate and India’s future.”
Gandhi said that the mistake of convicting him for the statement and refusing to stay the conviction was repeated three times, which is an additional reason that the Supreme Court should intervene and block the damage as soon as possible.
Gandhi added that first, an unspecified amorphous group of which, according to the complainant consisted of Rs 13 crore, was defamed. “Modi’s title in different parts of the country includes different communities and sub-communities, which usually have no commonalities or uniformities whatsoever,” his appeal read.
He also added that, secondly, the three specific persons mentioned in the letter, who alone could have suffered prejudice, did not file suit or file a complaint, instead the complainant simply bore the surname ‘Modi’ from Gujarat who did not He attended and was not detained. be prejudiced or offensive in any specific or personal sense.
“Thirdly, the complainant admitted that he is from Mood Vanika Samaj. This term is not interchangeable with Modi and Modi’s title is found in various castes.”
Asking the questions, Gandhi said, “It is not only strange, it is very important, it is really sinister, that all the past cases including all that are embodied in the present rhetoric, have been filed by members and officials of the ruling party. Ironically, the only people allegedly defamed from a presumably specific community of 13 crore are the office-holders or senior functionaries of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.”
The Congress leader was disqualified as a Member of Parliament on 24 March 2023 after a Gujarat court found him guilty and sentenced him to two years in prison for criminal defamation over comments he made about Modi’s surname. In a setback for the 53-year-old Gandhi, the Supreme Court rejected his petition to stay the conviction on July 7, arguing that “purity in politics” was the need of the hour.
A stay of Gandhi’s conviction would have paved the way for his reinstatement as MP for the Lok Sabha, but he failed to secure any dispensation from the Sessions Court or the Gujarat High Court. On 7 July itself, BJP MLA Purnesh Modi, plaintiff in the defamation case against Gandhi, lodged a warning in the Supreme Court asking to be heard if the Congress leader files a petition to challenge the Supreme Court’s ruling refusing to stay his conviction in the case.
A warning is served in the Court of Appeal by a litigant to have an opportunity to be heard before any order is made on the appeal of the litigant challenging the order or judgment of the court below. Poornesh Modi, a former Gujarat government minister, filed a criminal defamation case in 2019 against Gandhi over his remark “How can Modi be the common title of all thieves?” He made it during a campaign rally in Kolar in Karnataka on April 13, 2019.
A magistrate’s court in the city of Surat on March 23 sentenced the former Congress president to two years’ imprisonment after he was found guilty under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (criminal defamation). Following the ruling, Gandhi, who was elected to the Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala state in 2019, was disqualified as a member of parliament under the provisions of the People’s Representation Act.
Gandhi then challenged the order in a session court in Surat, along with a motion requesting that his conviction be stayed. While he was granted bail, on 20 April the Sessions Court refused to stay the conviction, after which he proceeded to the High Court.
(with input from PTI)
[ad_2]
