'Case Politically Motivated, Verdict Unlawful': 7 Things Rahul Said In His Plea

Video Producer/Editor: Shohini Bose

Ten days after a Gujarat court’s order in a defamation case over his Modi Surname remark, Rahul Gandhi filed a plea challenging his conviction in the Surat Sessions court on Monday, 3 April.

The appeal pointed out that the complaint against him was “politically motivated” and the two-year sentence granted to him was “contrary to the law.”

Following the filing of the plea, the sessions court then went on to grant Gandhi bail and stayed his sentence till the disposal of his plea. 

What else did the Congress leader argue in his plea? The Quint takes a look at the top 7 arguments.

Only Narendra Modi Could Have Filed Complaint

Gandhi has argued that BJP leader Purnesh Modi, who had filed the complaint, had no right to do so.

Why? Because as far as defamation is concerned, only a person aggrieved by the offence can file the complaint, the plea has said, according to Bar and Bench.

Just because his last name is ‘Modi’ and the alleged defamatory statement has the word 'Modi,' there was no reason for Purnesh Modi to file the complaint. Ideally, PM Modi should have done so because the statement included his name.

Purnesh Modi Is Not Necessarily An Aggrieved Person

Gandhi said that the trial court stated two reasons for the conviction  - that the complainant (BJP Leader Purnesh Modi) was shocked at his statements, and that his reputation was hurt. However these reasons do not make Purnesh Modi an aggrieved person under  IPC Sections 499 (defamation) and 500 (punishment for defamation).

Opposition leader has to be vocal critic of the government

It is his duty to be critical of the government and cause embarrassment to those in power as the leader of the opposition, Gandhi has said in his plea, according to Bar and Bench.

Complaint is Politically Motivated

The plea highlights that the complaint was filed for it to be used in the run up to the  2019 Lok Sabha elections, since Purnesh Modi was in-charge of the election of one of the Lok Sabha constituencies.

Also Named People Who Did Not Have ‘Modi Surname’

The plea points out that the statement which reportedly got Gandhi into trouble also mentions Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi, Vijay Mallya, and Anil Ambani. 

There Is No Modi Community On Record

The plea argued that for Gandhi to have defamed the entire Modi community, there have to be official records of it. However, he stated that there is no Modi Samaj or community established on record.

The plea adds: 

"Modis are 13 crores and obviously as per the ratio of the aforesaid judgments all 13 crore people will not have a right to file the complaint because it is not identifiable, definite, determinate group or collection of persons..."

Disqualification Led To The Rejection Of Electorate’s Mandate

Gandhi has said that the judge did not refer to previous judgments by courts across the country, where for defamation the maximum sentence has been imposed.

Commenting on this, Gandhi said:

Quick Recap: What We Know So Far

While the above arguments were mentioned in his appeal filed in the Surat court on Monday, the case came to light on 23 March when a Gujarat Court convicted him of defamation and sentenced him to two years in prison for it.

Here’s what has happened since then:

• Soon after the conviction order was passed, Gandhi's sentence was suspended for 30 days to enable him to appeal his conviction

• The next day (24 March), he was disqualified from the parliament. This led to him losing his Lok Sabha Membership

• Following his disqualification, he was also asked to vacate his government-alloted bungalow

• The court order and Gandhi’s subsequent disqualification led to furore among opposition leaders who protested during the Budget Session

• Meanwhile, another court in Patna has summoned Gandhi on 12 April to appear before it over  the same remark. The complaint has been filed by BJP MP from Bihar Purnesh Modi

So, What Next?

• Although the Sessions court on Monday stayed his two-year prison sentence in the case till the disposal of his appeal, it hasn't stayed his conviction yet

• A stay on his conviction is necessary before a reversal of his disqualification from the Parliament can be considered

• The Surat court has issued a notice to complainant Purnesh Modi who will have to file his response to the plea by 10 April

• The case will be heard next on 13 April

(With inputs from Bar and Bench)