Rahul Gandhi’s Appeal against Gujarat HC Order in “Modi Surname” Case to be Heard by Supreme Court on July 21
The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for July 21 to consider an appeal filed by Rahul Gandhi, a prominent Congress leader, challenging the Gujarat High Court's order in a criminal defamation case. Gandhi seeks to overturn his conviction and a two-year jail term. The case revolves around comments made by Gandhi regarding the "Modi" surname and its alleged connection to a BJP leader.
Rahul Gandhi’s appeal against the Gujarat High Court’s order in the “Modi surname” case is set to be heard by the Supreme Court on July 21. Gandhi’s appeal challenges his conviction and two-year jail term, emphasizing the potential consequences for free speech and democratic discourse. The outcome of this appeal will have implications for Gandhi’s political career and his eligibility to contest future elections.
Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has assigned the date of July 21 for the Supreme Court to hear Rahul Gandhi’s appeal. The appeal challenges the Gujarat High Court’s decision to uphold Gandhi’s conviction and two-year prison sentence in a criminal defamation case. Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Gandhi, requested an early hearing.
Gandhi filed his appeal on July 15, a week after the high court’s ruling that denied his request to suspend his conviction. In his appeal, Gandhi argues that the conviction should be immediately stayed to allow him to regain his status as a Member of Parliament (MP). He contends that the conviction order suppresses free speech, expression, thought, and statements, which could have severe implications for democracy and the political climate in India.
Gandhi’s appeal raises concerns about the classification of his political speech as an act of moral turpitude, resulting in severe punishment. He argues that such a finding threatens the freedom of political dialogue and debate critical of economic offenders and political figures like Narendra Modi. Gandhi contends that this precedent would stifle political expression and limit democratic discourse.
Purnesh Modi, the complainant in the case and a BJP leader, has submitted a caveat to the Supreme Court, ensuring that no orders are passed without hearing his side. This step indicates Modi’s intention to present his perspective in response to Gandhi’s appeal.
Background and Previous Rulings
Gandhi’s conviction and two-year jail term stemmed from remarks he made about the “Modi” surname during a political campaign. A Gujarat magisterial court found him guilty following a criminal complaint filed by Purnesh Modi. As a result, Gandhi was disqualified as an MP under the Representation of People Act. The Lok Sabha Secretariat confirmed his disqualification on March 24. The sessions court and the Gujarat High Court rejected Gandhi’s subsequent appeals for a stay on his conviction.
5 Controversial Statements by Rahul Gandhi: Instances that Sparked Debate
Rahul Gandhi, as been embroiled in numerous controversies due to his statements over the years. While facing legal consequences for the first time, his history of controversial remarks is extensive.
1. Allegations against Prime Minister Narendra Modi: One instance involved Rahul Gandhi targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the Supreme Court’s verdict on the Rafale fighter jet deal. Gandhi alleged that the Supreme Court had accepted that “chowkidar chor hai” (the watchman is a thief). This statement, directly aimed at PM Modi, stirred significant controversy. BJP MP and Union Minister Meenakshi Lekhi filed a contempt of court petition against Gandhi. Later, Gandhi apologized to the court, leading to the closure of the contempt case. However, the court advised him to exercise caution in his future speeches due to his influential political role.
2. Linking RSS to Mahatma Gandhi’s Assassination: In 2014, Rahul Gandhi drew controversy when he connected the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in Bhiwandi, Maharashtra. He alleged that the RSS was involved in Gandhi’s murder. A local RSS worker, Rajesh Kunte, filed a defamation case against him. In 2018, charges were framed against Gandhi, but he maintained his innocence. He approached the Supreme Court, asserting that he had never held the RSS responsible for Mahatma Gandhi’s murder. Additionally, a Guwahati court issued summons against him based on a criminal case filed by a local RSS volunteer, Anjan Bora.
3. Controversial Remark on ‘Rape in India’: During an election rally in Jharkhand, Rahul Gandhi courted controversy by stating, “Prime Minister Narendra Modi used to say ‘Make in India,’ but today we are seeing ‘Rape in India’.” He criticized the Modi government and the BJP, highlighting incidents of rape in Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh involving BJP members. A social worker filed a sedition case against Gandhi, alleging that his statement hurt people’s sentiments.
4. Accusation of ‘Khoon ki Dalali’ against PM Modi: In 2016, Rahul Gandhi accused PM Modi of engaging in “Khoon ki Dalali” (profiteering from blood) by politicizing anti-terrorist operations conducted by the Indian Army. He stated that while soldiers shed blood and carried out surgical strikes, the PM was taking advantage of their sacrifices. Gandhi later clarified his statement on Twitter, expressing support for surgical strikes while criticizing their use in political propaganda.
5. ‘Murder Accused’ Remark against Amit Shah: During a rally in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, in May 2019, Rahul Gandhi referred to Union Home Minister Amit Shah as a ‘murder accused.’ A defamation case was filed against him in Gujarat, leading to his conviction.
Conclusion: Rahul Gandhi’s political career has been marked by numerous controversial statements that have ignited heated debates and legal battles. His remarks have generated significant controversy from targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi to linking the RSS to Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. While his statements have faced legal consequences, they have also sparked discussions on the boundaries of political discourse and the impact of inflammatory rhetoric in the country’s democratic landscape.