The Surat Session Court in the case observed and has dismissed the application moved by Congress Leader, Rahul Gandhi wherein seeking for a stay on his conviction in the defamation case over his remarks, ‘why all thieves shar the Modi Surname’ made by him during a political campaign in Karol in April in the year 2019.
Therefore, the Surat Sessions Court Judge Robin Mogera in the case observed and has reserved its verdict after hearing Gandhi and the complainant, BJP’s Purnesh Modi on April 13.
If the application of Rahul Gandhi has been allowed then his membership of the Lok Sabha would have been restored, in relation to the issuance of notification of the LS Secretariat in this regard.
However, it may also be recalled that the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate sentenced Gandhi to two years in jail on March 23, wherein following which he is being disqualified as MP of Lok Sabha. Thus, the court suspended his sentence and Rahul Gandhi was granted bail to enable him to move an appeal against his conviction within 30 days.
Thus, the Session Court in the case granted bail on April 3, 2023, till the disposal of his appeal to Rahul Gandhi in the defamation case.
Facts of the Case:
The complaint was filed against the Congress Leader, Rahul Gandhi under Section 499 and Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by BJP MLA and former Gujarat minister Purnesh Modi Purnesh Modi, wherein it is alleged that the remarks made has defamed all people with the ‘Modi’ surname while addressing a rally at Kolar in Karnataka ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
Further, the remarks made by Rahul Gandhi has been video graphed by the video surveillance team and also it has also duly been notified by the video viewing team by the office of Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer, Kollar District.
In the said case, the Gujarat High Court in the case observed and has vacated the stay on trial in the case of criminal defamation in the month of February this year. Therefore, the Congress Leader, Gandhi Rahul Gandhi remained present in the court when the verdict was pronounced by the court. Thus, on earlier three occasions too, Rahul Gandhi was being present before the court.
Therefore, Rahul Gandhi has maintained that there being no malafide intention on his part when Gandhi made the statement in question
