New Delhi: India’s Supreme Court on Friday stayed the conviction of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case and questioned the sentence which seemed to fit precisely with the requirements of his removal from the Lok Sabha membership.

According to The Hindu, the stay has paved the way for Mr Gandhi to return to parliament. He can participate in the ongoing monsoon session if the Lok Sabha secretariat restores his membership.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice B.R. Gavai, pointed out that the Gujarat trial judge, other than severely admonishing Mr Gandhi for his alleged remarks, failed to give even a single reason for serving the Congress leader with the maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment.

The court said the magistrate had insisted on handing the Congress leader the severest punishment when the penal code allowed a choice between imprisonment and fine, or both.

The Gujarat High Court too, the Supreme Court said, while waxing eloquent about the various aspects of the case in a “voluminous” 120-page judgement, had somehow skipped addressing the issue of complete lack of reasons for giving Mr Gandhi the maximum punishment, The Hindu said.

The top court said Mr Gandhi was disqualified as MP for a total of eight years under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act solely due to the two-year sentence. “Had the duration of the sentence been a day less, provisions of the act would not have been attracted… The judge is expected to give reasons for imposing maximum sentence, particularly when the offence is non-cognisable, bailable and compoundable,” Justice Gavai observed.

The bench noted that “disqualification not only affects the rights of the individual but also that of the electorate he represents in parliament… the ramifications are wide”.

Rahul Gandhi’s lawyers, A.M. Singhvi and Prasanna S. said the courts had condemned the Congress leader to silence for eight years. “There is room for dissent in democracy. There should be mutual respect in politics,” Mr Singhvi said.

Court rebukes Gandhi

But the Supreme Court said Mr Gandhi’s alleged remarks, if made, were “not in good taste”. “A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of caution while making public speeches… The petitioner [Mr. Gandhi] ought to have been more careful,” it observed.

The court reminded Mr Gandhi of how it had advised him to be more careful in future with his public utterances while accepting his apology for his “chor” (thief) remarks during the previous general elections.

During the hearing, Mr Singhvi submitted that he had not seen any other defamation case in which a maximum two-year sentence had been awarded to an accused.

He said there had been no reason for the Gujarat High Court to reject Mr Gandhi’s plea to stay the conviction.

He said the case did not entail heinous offences such as rape, kidnap or murder, which involves moral turpitude. Mr Singhvi said Rahul Gandhi stood convicted of defaming an “amorphous group”.

Mr. Gandhi had already missed two parliament sessions. A list of cases filed against him show they were all by BJP members, Mr Singhvi argued. He debunked submissions that Mr Gandhi had criminal antecedents.

Published in Dawn, Aug 5th, 2023