The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday refused to pass an interim order on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s plea seeking stay on two-year conviction awarded by a lower court in a defamation case. Judge Hemant Prachchhak said he would pass the order after the summer vacation.
The Congress leader is seeking a stay on the conviction given to him by a lower court in Surat. While the lower court and the sessions court in Surat granted him bail till he moves the higher court, challenging the decision, a stay on the sentence was denied.
Senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared on behalf of Gandhi while Nirupam Nanavati appeared on behalf of BJP leader Purnesh Modi, the complainant.
Purnesh Modi had filed a complaint against Gandhi after he made a controversial remark on ‘Modi’ surname at a rally in Karnataka in 2019. Targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Gandhi had asked as to how all “thieves” have got the ‘Modi’ surname—a reference to fugitive businessmen Lalit Modi and Nirav Modi.
Singhvi requested the court to pass an interim order, but the judge said he would pronounce the order post vacation. Earlier, beginning his submissions, Nanavati pointed out that Gandhi was adopting double standards.
Citing newspaper clippings in which Gandhi has been quoted saying that he would continue to speak and is also reported to have said that the conviction is a gift, Nanavati said: “If you are a motormouth, you speak. If you do not want to apologize, it is your right but do not cry in the courtroom like a crybaby”.
The advocate also read out the remark made by Gandhi after the conviction—“My name is Gandhi and I am not Savarkar and won’t apologize.” Nanavati further argued that if Gandhi is a “motormouth” and is facing 12 similar cases, then he should not say that he was wrongly convicted.
Gandhi, who represented Kerala’s Wayanad in Lok Sabha, was disqualified as MP after the lower court convicted him and awarded a two-year jail term.
Putting forth his submissions, Singhvi questioned as to what if the Election Commission declared a by-election in Wayanad. The Election Commission, he said, isn’t bothered that the case is being heard in the high court.
Singhvi went on to say that for an MP, the disqualification is a matter of big significance. He also said that the speeches made during election campaigns should be treated with greater latitude.
Justice Prachchhak started hearing the case on April 29. Tuesday’s was the second hearing. Earlier, Judge Gita Gopi had recused herself from hearing the case, saying “not before me”.
