“On Friday, August 4, the Supreme Court intervened by placing a hold on the conviction of Rahul Gandhi, a prominent Congress leader, in a defamation case. Previously, a court in Surat had found him culpable and meted out the maximum punishment of a two-year prison term, leading to his disqualification from the Lok Sabha. Despite Gandhi’s appeal to the Gujarat High Court for a stay on the conviction, the request was denied, prompting him to take his case to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s directive cast doubt on the sentencing imposed by the lower court. Justices B.R. Gavai, P.S. Narasimha, and P.V. Sanjay Kumar, comprising the bench, observed that the trial court had not provided specific justifications for imposing the harshest penalty allowable under the offense.
Quoting from the court’s decision, as reported by LiveLaw:
“The punishment for an offense punishable under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code is a maximum of two years of imprisonment or a fine, or both. The learned trial judge, in his order, opted for the maximum sentence of two years. Apart from this Court’s reprimand to the petitioner in a contempt proceeding, the learned trial judge did not furnish any other rationale for awarding the maximum two-year sentence. It is noteworthy that it was solely due to the two-year maximum sentence handed down by the trial judge that the provisions of Section 8(3) of the Representation of Peoples Act came into play. If the sentence had been one day shorter, these provisions would not have been applicable.
Especially when dealing with a non-compoundable, bailable, and cognizable offense, it was incumbent upon the learned trial judge to expound on the reasons behind imposing the most severe punishment. Despite the extensive elaboration by the learned appellate court and the High Court in rejecting the appeals, these particular aspects were not adequately addressed.”
However, the Supreme Court also remarked that Gandhi’s comments in Kolar prior to the 2019 elections – the comments that led to the filing of the case – were “in poor taste.” Gandhi had remarked, “I have a question. Why do all these thieves have Modi in their names, whether it is Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, or Narendra Modi? We don’t know how many more such Modis will emerge.”
A defamation suit had been brought against Gandhi by BJP leader Purnesh Modi, alleging that Gandhi’s comments had tarnished the reputation of the ‘Modi community’. Gandhi has steadfastly maintained his innocence and declined to offer an apology, while also asserting that the Modi surname does not represent a single, unified community.”