Ahmedabad | The Gujarat High Court, while dismissing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's plea seeking a stay on his conviction in a 2019 criminal defamation case over his "Modi surname" remark, on Friday observed "it is now the need of the hour to have purity in politics”.
Justice Hemant Prachchhak, who dismissed the plea, also observed “representatives of people should be men of clear antecedent" and noted a stay on conviction is not a rule, but an exception, resorted only in rare cases.
Delivering the verdict, Justice Prachchhak noted that Gandhi (53) was already facing 10 criminal cases across India and held the trial court's order handing a two-year jail term to him for his remark -- leading to his disqualification from the Lok Sabha -- was "just, proper and legal".
The judge maintained the former Congress president was seeking a stay on the guilty verdict on non-existent grounds.
"He (Gandhi) was trying to stay the conviction on absolutely non-existent grounds. It is a well-settled principle of law that staying of conviction is not a rule, but an exception, resorted only in rare cases. Disqualification is not only limited to MPs, MLAs. Moreover, as many as 10 criminal cases are pending against the applicant," the HC noted.
Referring to the cases Gandhi is facing, the High Court further observed that "It is now the need of the hour to have purity in politics. Representatives of people should be men of clear antecedent." Justice Prachchhak pointed out that after the current complaint was filed, another complaint was submitted in a court in Pune by the grandson of Hindutva ideologue V D Savarkar for the Congress leader's "defamatory utterance against Veer Savarkar at Cambridge". Also, a separate complaint against him was filed in a Lucknow court.
In this backdrop, refusal of stay on conviction would not in any way result in injustice to the applicant, the judge said.
"The impugned order passed by the appellate court (in Surat) is just, proper and legal, and does not call for any interference. However, it is hereby requested the concerned learned district judge to decide the criminal appeal on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible," said the HC.
Referring to Gandhi's submission that the offence for which he was convicted was not serious, the judge noted his conviction is a "serious matter affecting a large segment of the society and needs to be viewed by this court with the gravity and significance it commands".
The court maintained it was not an "individual-centric defamation case", but something which affected a "large section of the society".
"The offence of Section 499 (dealing with defamation) can certainly be considered to be a serious offence of having a large public character thereby affecting the society at large in a given case wherein a large number of persons of the society have been defamed," said the HC order.
The court noted the Congress leader, while addressing a poll rally where he made the controversial remark, took Prime Minister Narendra Modi's name in his speech to "add sensation" and with an intention to "affect the result" of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
Countering Gandhi's submission that the offence was not serious, the HC noted "That the accused was a Member of Parliament, president of second largest national level political party and president of the party that ruled in the country for more than 50 years, who was giving a speech to the thousands of people and made a false statement in the election with clear intention to affect the result of the election." The judge said the disqualified MP, speaking at the rally, was seeking to add sensation by taking the PM's name.
"It appears the accused suggested the name of the Hon'ble Prime Minister to add sensation, apparently and for an intention to affect the result of the election of the candidate of the concerned constituency belonging to the political party of the Prime Minister," the order said.
The HC said the current defamation case was serious in nature.
"The accused did not stop there but imputed that 'saare choro ke naam Modi hi kyu hai'. Thus, the present case would certainly fall within the category of seriousness of the offence," said the order.
"In view of the above, the present criminal revision application deserved to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed," observed the judge, while reading the order.
Noting there was no reasonable ground to stay the conviction at this stage, Justice Prachchhak also directed the district and sessions court of Surat to hear Gandhi's appeal against the conviction "as expeditiously as possible".
A metropolitan magistrate's court in Surat 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) in a 2019 case filed by Gujarat Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Purnesh Modi.
Following the verdict, Gandhi, elected to the Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala in 2019, was disqualified as a Member of Parliament (MP) under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
Gandhi then challenged the order in a sessions court in Surat, which is still pending, along with an application seeking a stay to the conviction. While granting him bail, the sessions court on April 20 refused to stay the conviction, following which the Congress leader approached the HC for relief.
Purnesh Modi, a former Gujarat minister, filed a criminal defamation case in a Surat court against Gandhi over his '"How come all thieves have Modi as the common surname?' remark made during an election rally at Kolar in Karnataka on April 13, 2019.
