SC to hear tomorrow Rahul Gandhi's appeal against Gujarat HC verdict in defamation case
New Delhi, Jul 20: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Friday Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's appeal against the Gujarat High Court verdict dismissing his plea seeking a stay on his conviction in a defamation case over his "Modi surname" remark.
A bench of justices B R Gavai and P K Mishra will likely take up the matter tomorrow.
A bench headed by CJI D Y Chandrachud had on July 18 agreed to hear Gandhi's plea after senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi mentioned the matter and sought urgent hearing.
In his appeal, Gandhi has said if the July 7 HC judgment is not stayed, it will lead to "throttling of free speech, expression, thought, and statement".
Purnesh Modi, a former minister in the Gujarat government, had filed a criminal defamation case in 2019 against Gandhi over his "how all thieves have Modi as the common surname" remark made during an election rally at Kolar in Karnataka on April 13, 2019. He was apparently referring to businessmen Nirav Modi and Lalit Modi, two fugitive prominent businessmen wanted in India.
Gandhi has said in his plea he will suffer irreparable injury if the HC order is not stayed. He has said an irreversible consequence of not staying the order will result in injustice as, because of the conviction, he currently stands disqualified as a Member of Parliament from Wayanad in Kerala and cannot participate in parliamentary proceedings.
Gandhi, as an interim relief, has sought an ad-interim ex-parte stay of the July 7 order of the Gujarat High court during the pendency of this appeal in the top court.
The Congress leader was disqualified as an MP on March 24 after a Gujarat court convicted and sentenced him to two-year imprisonment on the charge of criminal defamation for comments he made about the Modi surname.
In a setback to the 53-year-old Gandhi, the high court had dismissed his petition for a stay on conviction on July 7, observing that "purity in politics" is the need of the hour.
A stay on Gandhi's conviction could have paved the way for his reinstatement as a Lok Sabha MP but he failed to get any relief from either the sessions court or the Gujarat High Court.
A metropolitan magistrate's court in Surat had on March 23 sentenced the former Congress president to two years in jail after convicting him under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 499 and 500 (criminal defamation).
Following the verdict, Gandhi was disqualified as an MP under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
Gandhi challenged the order in a sessions court in Surat and filed an application seeking a stay on his conviction.
While granting him bail, the Surat sessions court had on April 20 refused to stay the conviction, following which he approached the high court.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
FIR filed against TMC's Abhishek over 'inflammatory' remarks during Bengal polls
Kolkata (PTI): The West Bengal Police on Saturday said they have registered an FIR against Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee for allegedly making inflammatory statements during the recently concluded assembly elections.
The FIR was lodged based on a complaint filed by Social activist Rajib Sarkar at Baguiati Police Station in North 24 Parganas district on May 5, a day after the assembly election results were declared, alleging that the TMC national general secretary made provocative comments on post-poll violence and the vote counting process, a senior officer said.
The complainant also claimed that Banerjee's inflammatory comments were linked to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, he said.
"Following due procedure after the filing of the complaint, an FIR was formally registered at the Cyber Crime Police Station under the Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate on May 15," the officer said.
The case has been registered under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Representation of the People Act, he said.
The complainant accused Banerjee of delivering inflammatory speeches during several election-related programmes between April 27 and May 3.
“The complainant alleged that certain remarks made during public meetings were provocative in nature and had the potential to disturb public order and communal harmony. The contents are being examined as part of the investigation,” the police officer added.
