Thread by @LiveLawIndia

Gujarat High Court beings hearing the criminal revision plea filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) seeking a stay on his conviction in the defamation case over his remark “why all thieves share the Modi surname” made during a political campaign in 2019.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi) appears for Rahul Gandhi before the bench of Justice Hemant M. Prachchhak.

#GujaratHighCourt
#DefamationCase
#RahulGandhi twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi): The alleged offence is neither serious nor involves moral turpitude and hence, the conviction should be suspended.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi

Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi): For the offending speech, no evidence in terms of the Evidence Act, or IT Act was produced to justify the conviction.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi

Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi): No proof of the alleged statements of Gandhi was produced before the Court.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi

Sr Adv Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi): A case, which the Court below relied upon, operates in my favour. Again Navjot Singh Sidhu case was cited by the Court. In fact, Sidhu, was convicted under 302 IPC but his conviction was suspended.

Rape, Murder, and Abduction cases were… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: There is no identifiable class (of Modi community) so as to maintain a complaint, so, Lordship, the maintainability of the complaint in the case itself, is questionable.

#RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In serious cases like Murder, in Navjot Singh Sidhu matter, the conviction was stayed. In my case, neither a serious case is there, nor moral turpitude is involved and still conviction is not stayed.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: There is no bar on grant of stay of conviction even in serious cases, only that, the power is to be used sparingly.

#RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt #Defamation #defamationcase

Sr. Adv. Singhvi refers to cases where MPs/MLAs, involved in more serious offences, a stay on conviction was granted by the High Court.

#RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt #Defamation #defamationcase

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In far more serious cases, conviction was stayed, if the argument of the complainant is accepted that conviction can't be stayed, Section 389 CrPC will move to a vanishing point.

#RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt #Defamation #defamationcase

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The Court has to see a prima facie case, assume there is a prima facie case, then what extra can a man show while seeking a stay on his conviction.

One could be the irreversibility of the situation.

#RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt #Defamation… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Today, even if two sessions of parliament go, it entails a consequence that I am unable to raise my voice, the people of the constituency lose their rights to get their voices raised in the parliament. Even if after 12 months, my conviction is stayed, the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Meanwhile, if the Election Commission notifies by-election and someone else gets elected, later on, if I win the appeal, the situation is irreversible. I could not contest the election, but that doesn't mean I lost the election, but the person elected can't be… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: On a pure balance of convenience also, coupled with irreversible conditions, and additionally, the consequences for a public servant if a conviction does not stay, what more do I need to show?

#rahulgandhidisqualified #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Rarely have I seen in my criminal practice, a conviction in a criminal defamation case, and if it has happened, the sentence is for 3 months or 6 months.

This situation cries for redressal.

#rahulgandhidisqualified #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt #Defamation

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites a case where in a Prevention Of Corruption Act case, the conviction was stayed in the case of an MLA wherein the court noted that if the conviction was not stayed, irreversible losses will occur.

#rahulgandhidisqualified #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites the case concerning an Odisha MLA, wherein the Court said if the conviction is not stayed, it will have consequences not for the MLA but will burden the public exchequer as a by-election will have to be conducted.

#rahulgandhidisqualified #RahulGandhi… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In the media, there were several suggestions that why the appeal is not preferred. I don't deal with supersonic appeals.

In my case, after the order, the disqualification notification was issued in 24 hours.

#rahulgandhidisqualified #RahulGandhi #Defamation

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: I am convicted of the maximum sentence, but the magistrate stays sentences, sessions court, in appeal, makes the order absolute, thereby granting bail till the conclusion of the appeal. Before the sessions court, the state counsel appeared but did not argue.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In criminal matters, a complainant has to be aggrieved for redressal. After the conviction, at the most, he can say that he must be punished. But in this case, under his nose, my sentence was stayed, and he did not challenge the same...

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: ...but he goes on to challenge my appeal for a stay on conviction before the Sessions Court. What was the complainant's concern with my disqualification?

#GujaratHighCourt #defamationcase #defamation #RahulGandhi

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Under 499 IPC, you (Complainant) must be the aggrieved person, which is not the case. Defamation cases are bilateral cases, defamation cases are intended to operate in-personam.

#GujaratHighCourt #defamationcase #defamation #RahulGandhi

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: When the complainant entered the court with his complainant, there was no case as per Section 499 IPC.

The persons whom I named (3 persons) did not file a case against me.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #Defamation #RahulGandhi #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The complainant says in his complaint that I am filing the complaint because I belong to the Modi community and it says that in Gandhi's utterances, 13 crore people of the community are hurt.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: If I say that XYZ community is bad, anyone belonging to that community can't come and file the case against me, it is the law.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #Defamation

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Anyone from the so-called community of 13 crore people can not come and file a complaint against me, except the ones who were named by me in the speech. In fact, I did not name Complainant (Purnesh Modi).

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi

Sr. Adv. Singhvi (citing a case): Where writing weighs against mankind in general or against a particular order of men, men of their own, it is no libel.

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #Defamation

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites the following paragraph from the 2016 ruling of Apex Court in Subramanian Swamy vs Union Of India, Min. Of Law

link: indiankanoon.org/doc/80997184/

#GujaratHighCourt #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi #ModiSurname #Defamation

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites the following paragraph from the 1984 ruling of the #GujaratHighCourt case in Narottamdas L. Shah vs Patel Maganbhai Revabhai And Anr.

link: indiankanoon.org/doc/620927/

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The complainant in his deposition says "It is true Modi surname doesn't mean that it belongs to a certain community"

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The complainant forms a trust related to the Modi community in 2015 named 'Modi Samast Gujarat Samaj' and says before the Court that I don't have anything else other than the letter head of that trust (which he himself created) that there exists a modi… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Sr. Adv. Singhvi now cites cases concerning 'much more identifiable and much much narrower, much much smaller classes' communities which were held to be indeterminate.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Prime Minister is not involved in the case, he has not filed the case. He is certainly an identifiable class.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Complainant says that the Accused (Rahul Gandhi) didn't take his name. If everyone from the unidentifiable community is allowed to file case then 499 IPC and 199 CrPC will have no meaning.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The Judge says that he bases his case on the ground that I (Gandhi) was admonished by the Supreme Court in the Rafale case and was asked to be more careful and since you were warned there, your error here is more. this is direct finding

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Supreme Court order (Rafale case) was delivered on 14-11-2019 and the alleged statement was made on 13-4-2019, it is an apparent error of the court asking him to be retrospectively careful

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Supreme Court's order in the Rafale case was the basis of the order, but the same was not put to the Accused (Gandhi) and I (Gandhi) was not confronted with the same.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: This rafale case contention was raised before the Sessions Court but its order did not say anything about it.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The summoning order to Gandhi was issued on 2-5-2019 but on that day he did not have prosecutable evidence/material before him.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi:

1) The complainant did not say that I was in the audience when the statement was made by Gandhi.

2) Complainant says that he received a WhatsApp message of the impugned statement of Gandhi. But the sender's name not disclosed.

#ModiSurname #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: It is hearsay upon hearsay, no pendrive was produced. What was the prosecutable material?

The complainant admitted that he did not have the content of the speech when he moved complaint.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Pendrive, Youtube materials were produced later on, but on the day of issuance of summons, what was the material before the Court? Nothing

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The alleged statement (of Gandhi) was not proved at all. Two 313 CrPC statements were recorded (in 2021), and when the complainant realised he had not produced the material/speech...

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: ...he files an application in 2022 February that please reopen the pendrive, youtube speech. The trial court rejected the same saying that 313 Statements are recorded, ship has sailed.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In March 2022 he sought a stay on trial, and till February 2023, he was happy with the stay on the case. Meanwhile, no new evidence and no material were submitted. Again in February 2023, he seeks a vacation stay.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #RahulGandhi

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: In March 2022, due to his behaviour in the court that he doesn't wish to argue case, the Court closed his evidence. Thereafter, he moved the HC, seeking a stay on trial proceedings.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He himself sought a stay on its own complaint, and after almost 1 year, in February 2023, he seeks vacation of the order of the Stay saying that new facts and sufficient material have come on record.

But nothing had changed meanwhile.

#GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: 202 CrPC compliance was not made by the Magistrate, and no inquiry was conducted. Yes, no judgment is required at that stage, but where is the application of mind?

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The use of the expression ‘shall’ under Sectio 202 CrPC prima facie makes the inquiry or the investigation, as the case may be, by the Magistrate mandatory.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: There is no evidence regarding the conduct of inquiry by the Magistrate as per Section 202 CrPC requirement.

Also, the alleged speech is not proved in the Court.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: On the day of conviction, there was no admissible evidence before Court.

1) Whatsapp message (containing alleged speech) not proved
2) Pendrive not produced, no mention of it in complaint

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Pendrive is not exhibited.

No 65B Evidence Act certificate was produced to support the recording.

The CD containing the alleged speech appears miraculously through one witness Yaji.
#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: This witness (Yaji) is not there in the complaint, not in the witness list, and he appears only in early 2021. He is a member of the BJP and a close associate of the Complainant.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Yaji brings the CD (containing the alleged speech) claiming that he got it through the Election Commission.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He says in his deposition that he received the CD from the Election Commission of India lying in open condition and I am not sure from where the ECI got the CD.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He says I am associated with BJP for 45 years and have held various posts.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: I call 'Yaji', a magical miracle man as he was not there in the complaint or list of witnesses and he suddenly appears after a long time stating that he had heard the speech.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

The bench now rises for lunch. Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi) to continue his arguments post-lunch.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Bench resumes hearing in the matter

@RahulGandhi

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The court decision on whether to stay the conviction or not is between the court and the accused, the complainant has no concern, and if they are heard, much weightage shouldn't be given.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: You (Purnesh Modi) are a complainant, what is your concern with my (Rahul Gandi) disqualification? You are concerned with the sentence but why are you interested in my disqualification

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: I am a legislator, I will lose your seat, even if the election is held, I can not contest. The consequences of non-stay on conviction are drastic and irreversible.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: They say that a week's time is enough in politics, here I am losing the right to contest for 8 years. Here, if the bullet is fired, nothing can happen. If the conviction is not stayed, I will be barred from contesting the election semi-permanently.

#ModiSurname… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi) for Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) concludes his arguments.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin begins his argument. He argues that he has a right to argue in such a matter. He also argues that the law provides for a maximum of 2 years of punishment that can be awarded in such a case.

#ModiSurname #Defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Justice Hemant: What do you have to say on the lacuna he (Sr. Adv. Singhvi) raised?

Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin: Those lacunas under 202 CrPC are not to be raised her before the HC seeking a stay on conviction.

#ModiSurname #Defamationcase #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin: Offence may be non-cognizable, bailable but these arguments pale into insignificance once the conviction is ordered. This ground has no value in plea-seeking stay on conviction.

#ModiSurname #Defamationcase #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

PP Amin: The legislature allows a maximum sentence of two years and the Magistrate has found it to be a fit case for imposing the maximum punishment. At this stage, no challenge can be made against it. Only seriousness has to be seen here.

#ModiSurname #Defamationcase… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

PP Amin: The conviction should not be stayed by the HC.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Nirupam Nanavati (for complainant Purnesh Modi) argues against the filing of a criminal revision plea by Rahul Gandhi.

#ModiSurname #DefamationCase #defamation #RahulGandhi #GujaratHighCourt

Sr. Adv. Nirupam Nanavati (for complainant Purnesh Modi): The petition isn't maintainable. They should clarify under what provision have they approached. They should clarify this point and then I will file a reply.

Justice Hemant: I can give you time till Tuesday so that you… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Justice Hemant: ...file a reply/affidavit. I have to complete the proceedings since sufficient time has already been invested in this matter.

#GujaratHighCourt #RahulGandhiDisqualified #RahulGandhi #Defamation #DefamationCase #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi urges the bench, before it rises, to hear his short rejoinder on the challenge to his revision plea.

Justice Hemant allows his request.

#GujaratHighCourt #RahulGandhiDisqualified #RahulGandhi #Defamation #DefamationCase #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The order that has been challenged in our revision plea is the final order of the court, finally rejecting my plea seeking a stay of conviction.

#GujaratHighCourt #RahulGandhiDisqualified #RahulGandhi #Defamation #DefamationCase #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The order of the court below is final as my plea for a stay to conviction has been finally decided and that order is not an interim order. The order of the Sessions Judge is not an interlocutory order.

#GujaratHighCourt #RahulGandhi #DefamationCase #ModiSurname

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: There is no need for the complainant to file any reply in the case.

Justice Hemant: Let them file a reply. We will conclude the hearing on Tuesday itself. File a reply by Tuesday.

Hearing ends

#GujaratHighCourt #RahulGandhi #DefamationCase #ModiSurname