As SC Stays Rahul Gandhi's Defamation Conviction, Will He Be Back in Parliament?

The Wayanad MP had been disqualified from parliament after a Gujarat court found him guilty of criminal defamation.

As the Supreme Court on Friday, 4 August, stayed Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's conviction in the criminal defamation case filed against him over his 2019 “Modi surname” remark, a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai said:

“We are of the considered view that the ramifications of the ruling are wide, and affect the rights of his constituency's electorate.”

The Wayanad MP, had been disqualified from parliament soon after a Magistrate court in Gujarat found him guilty of criminal defamation on 23 March, in a case filed against him by BJP leader Purnesh Modi.

While he appealed the decision of the Magistrate court at a Surat sessions court, he also sought a stay on his conviction, which could potentially pave the way for him to get his seat back in parliament, while his case got tried on merits at the Sessions Court.

So, now that the apex court has stayed his conviction, the key question that arises is: what happens to Gandhi’s disqualification from the parliament? Will he get back his seat? And when? The Quint explains.

Gandhi’s Disqualification & What The Supreme Court Said

The Congress leader’s disqualification from parliament was based on the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which provides for the disqualification of a person convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment for two years or more.

The relevant portion of the act (Section 8(3)) says:

“A person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years...shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release..."

This meant that not only would Gandhi be barred from the parliament for a long time, he would also not be able to contest the upcoming 2024 Assembly elections.

While the magistrate court did impose a two-year sentence on him along with a fine, the top court on Friday, pointed out that the judge had not given specific reasons for imposing the maximum sentence.

“No specific reason has been granted by trial judge to impose maximum sentence apart from a comment by this Court. Had the sentence been even a day lesser, the provisions (pertaining to disqualification) would not have applied,” a bench of Justices BR Gavai, PS Narasimha and PV Sanjay Kumar, said.

“Learned trial judge was at least expected to give reasons for imposing maximum sentence for a non-cognizable offence,” the court added.

So, Will He Get Back His Seat Now?

Yes. This disqualification is supposed to lose applicability once the conviction has been stayed.

According to Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Paras Nath Singh, here’s what the process will look like:

“As a matter of formality, the Lok Sabha secretariat will have to issue a notification to put the previous disqualification notification in abeyance.”

But by when should the notification ideally come?

“There is no time limit but the point is very simple — when he was automatically disqualified upon conviction by the magistrate court, there has to be an immediate restoration also, when conviction has been stayed,” Singh pointed out.

“It has to be immediate because, all they have to do is issue a notification citing the Supreme Court order,” he added.

What Happens if He Doesn't Get His Seat Back Immediately?

An answer to this question can be found in Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal’s case.

Faizal, a Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader, was sentenced to 10 years in jail by a trial court on 11 January in an attempt to murder case.

But on 25 January this year, the Kerala High Court stayed the conviction on the grounds that it will force yet another election and unnecessarily burden the exchequer.

When the Lok Sabha did not issue a notification re-instating him for over two months after the stay, Faizal approached the Supreme Court. However, hours before the top court took up his case, the Lok Sabha secretariat gave him his seat back.

“This is an excellent precedent and example of why Gandhi should get back his seat now that his conviction has been stayed. If not, then he has a legal remedy to challenge it in top court like Faizal did,” Advocate Singh said.

And, What Happens To The Case Against Him Now? Is It Over?

Not really.

Former Bombay and Rajasthan High Court Chief Justice Pradeep Nandarajog had pointed out, in connection with a previous piece, that if the top court stayed Gandhi’s conviction (which it has now), his case will still go to trial and be decided on merits.

Important to remember here is that when the magistrate court found him guilty of criminal defamation, Gandhi appealed the decision at a Gujarat Sessions Court. Along with that, he filed an application to stay his conviction. While the latter has been taken care of with the Supreme Court’s order on Friday, the former is still pending.