Keywords: CONVICTION, DEFAMATION CASE
On Friday, July 7, the Gujarat High Court rejected Congressman Rahul Gandhi’s appeal of his conviction in the criminal defamation action brought against him due to his remark about the “Modi surname” in 2019.[1]
On Friday, Justice Hemant Prachchhak announced the main portion of the verdict and reaffirmed that the Sessions court’s earlier decision to uphold the conviction was “fair and lawful.”
On Thursday, April 20, a Sessions Court in Surat denied Congressman Rahul Gandhi’s request for a stay of his conviction.
On March 23, a Surat Magistrate court found Rahul Gandhi guilty of criminal defamation and gave him a two-year prison term for his claimed remark that “all people with the Modi surname are thieves” during an electoral rally in Kolar, Gujarat, in April 2019.
A day later, he lost his status as a Lok Sabha member.
“On completely fictitious grounds, (Gandhi) is requesting a stay of execution. Maintaining your conviction is not required. There are as many as 10 active cases against Gandhi. Politics must be pure, Justice Prachchhak emphasized when issuing the directive on Friday.
Furthermore, the bench declared that given the circumstances of the current case, there is no basis for staying the conviction.
“In anyway, conviction would not result in any injustice to the applicant. The conviction order is just, proper and legal. There is no need to interfere with the said order. Therefore, the application is dismissed,” the Court held.
The High Court highlighted that Gandhi would not suffer any harm if the conviction was not stayed, while acknowledging that giving stays in such situations is unusual.
However, the court highlighted the need for the criminal appeal to be decided as quickly as possible and on the basis of its own merits.
Written by- Jaydeep Ramani, College name – Veer Narmad South Gujarat University, Semester- 7 an intern under Legal Vidhiya
[1] https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/gujarat-hc-dismisses-rahul-gandhis-plea-seeking-stay-on-conviction-in-defamation-case/articleshow/101562158.cms
