Rahul’s offense is neither serious nor does it involve moral turpitude, Singhvi tells Gujarat HC

Rahul Gandhi's Conviction in defamation case

0
Rahul Gandhi

AHMEDABAD: Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi on Saturday told the Gujarat High Court that the alleged offense for which Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has been convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment is neither serious nor involves moral turpitude. Singhvi sought a stay on the conviction of the former Congress president in the 2019 defamation case.

In his application in the court of Justice Hemant Prachak, Singhvi said, “A bailable, non-cognizable offense with a maximum sentence of two years means that he can lose his Lok Sabha seat “permanently”. maybe lost, which is a very serious matter for the individual and the constituency he represents. The High Court is hearing Rahul Gandhi’s plea that the ‘Modi surname’ The Surat sessions court’s order not to stay his conviction in a criminal defamation case relating to his remarks has been challenged.

Justice Hemant Prachhak heard Gandhi’s criminal revision petition challenging the April 20 order of the sessions court. Surat’s Metropolitan Magistrate court on March 23 convicted the former Congress president under sections 499 and 500 (criminal defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a 2019 case filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Purnesh Modi in Gujarat. While staying, he was sentenced to two years in jail. Following the verdict, Gandhi was disqualified from membership in Parliament under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.

Rahul Gandhi was elected to the Lok Sabha in 2019 from Wayanad, Kerala. The Surat sessions court had on April 20 rejected his plea to stay the conviction of the Congress leader. Gandhi is currently out on bail in this case. Singhvi told the high court that the trial process in the case was based on “seriously flawed facts”. The Congress leader was convicted. He said, “In the case of a public servant or an MP, there are very serious and lasting consequences for that person and the constituency, and this can result in harsh re-election as well.

Rahul Gandhi

He also questioned the complainant and BJP MLA Purnesh Modi not challenging Gandhi’s application for a stay of sentence in the sessions court, but challenging the stay of conviction that led to the Congress leader’s disqualification as an MP. Singhvi said that the complainant Modi was not named in the alleged speech given by Gandhi during an election rally in Kolar, Karnataka on April 13, 2019. Gandhi’s counsel said that under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, the complainant must be an aggrieved person, and that is not the case in this case.

Singhvi said that in the Navjot Singh Sidhu case, he was convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, but his sentence was suspended. He said, “In my case, there is neither a serious matter nor moral turpitude involved in it. Despite this, the sentence has not been stayed.&8221; Earlier, the matter was mentioned for urgent hearing before the court of Justice Gita Gopi. Justice Gopi later recused himself from the hearing and the matter was then assigned to Justice Prachhak.

Advertisement