by Amreen Ahmad

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in a criminal defamation case over his ‘Modi surname’ remark was put on hold by the Supreme Court today. Which said that while his remarks were not in good taste, his disqualification from parliament would affect his constituents. The trial judge had awarded the maximum sentence of two years in the case, the top court observed, pointing out that it would not have attracted disqualification as an MP.

Rahul Gandhi had in April told a sessions court in Surat his conviction by a Justice court in the 2019 defamation case was inaccurate, patently malicious, and he was sentenced in a manner so as to attract disqualification as a Member of Parliament. He had said he was treated intensely by the trial court, which was powerfully shapeed by his status as an MP. No doubt that the utterances by the petitioner were not in good taste, the Supreme Court said today, “and the petitioner ought to have been more careful in making speeches”. “The consequences of disqualification not just affect the right of the individual but also the electorate,” it said. This was Rahul Gandhi’s last chance before liberation, and will allow him to attend the parliament and contest elections, his lawyer earlier argued in the court, adding that the High Court had reserved its judgement for 66 days, and due to conviction in the case, Mr Gandhi has already lost two Parliament sessions. A Supreme Court bench of Justices BR Gavai, PS Narasimha, and Sanjay Kumar was hearing Rahul Gandhi’s request for a stay on his conviction. The Gujarat High Court had earlier refused to stay his conviction in the criminal defamation case. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Rahul Gandhi, said the trial has been completed, and Mr Gandhi has even been convicted, yet there is no evidence so far. Mr Singhvi said this is the first time 30 crore people have held to be an recognizable class. They are shapeless, unclear, non-homogenous communities, castes, and groups with designation ‘Modi’ are totally different. Justice Gavai had at the beginning of the hearing said Mr Gandhi will have to make out an exceptional case for a stay on conviction, to which Mr Singhvi said he was not arguing conviction today. Mr Singhvi argued the complainant Purnesh Modi’s original surname is not Modi, and he had changed it. The protestor Purnesh Modi himself said that his original surname was not Modi. He belongs to Modh Vanika Samaj, he argued, and claimed not a single of the persons Mr Gandhi had named during his speech have legal action taken against him. Truth has won today, said Congress MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury after Supreme Court stayed Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in a 2019 defamation case adding that he has spoken to the Speaker in Parliament for reinstating Rahul’s membership at the earliest.