The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to hear on July 21 (Friday) a plea by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for stay on his conviction in a defamation case for his 2019 remarks on the 'Modi' surname.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud fixed the date of hearing upon an urgent mentioning made by senior advocate A M Singhvi.
The counsel sought a direction for listing the matter on Friday or Monday.
In his special leave petition, Gandhi challenged the Gujarat High Court's July 7 decision declining his plea for stay on the conviction relying upon "extraneous and irrelevant factors" like pendency of similar cases against him.
Justifying his 2019 statement, Gandhi said he has the right to criticise and comment upon the measures undertaken by the Prime Minister, who is his political opponent, and merely because he was critical or he had a different opinion, the complaint for defamation can’t be sustained against him.
A single bench of Justice Hemant Prachchhak in the HC had said that in view of Gandhi's conduct and other pending cases against him, the conviction in the present case would not do any injustice to him.
The court also pointed out that stay on conviction is not a rule, but rather an exception.
"Moreover, as many as 10 criminal cases are pending against the applicant. It is now the need of the hour to have purity in politics...After the complaint in the present case, another complaint was filed at Pune by the grandson of Veer Savarkar against the applicant," the bench had said.
On March 23, 2023, the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Surat had held Gandhi guilty for the offence of defamation and awarded him the maximum two-year jail term based on the case filed by BJP leader Purnesh Modi.
The conviction has led to the disqualification of Gandhi as Wayanad MP. On April 20, a sessions court in Surat had dismissed Gandhi's plea to stay his conviction. Subsequently, the HC has also rejected his plea for suspending the conviction, affecting his chances of getting back his legislative position.
Gandhi stated in his plea that in a democracy, the opinion of the people is supreme and the choice of the voter is treated as the will of the people, but the verdict under appeal has directly led to a situation resulting in the disqualification of the petitioner as a legislator.
"If the operation of the judgement of conviction is not stayed, a by-election shall be held within the period stipulated and the petitioner shall forfeit his right to represent the constituency and his political party for the remaining part of his tenure," the plea stated.
He stated this loss is irreparable as even the subsequent acquittal of the petitioner cannot undo the damage and the issue may also be looked at from the point of view of the electorate.
He also contended a political speech criticising the government or a section of society, even if defamatory, cannot be equated with moral turpitude.
Gandhi also claimed that if the conviction is not stayed, it would lead to throttling of free speech, expression, thought, and statement.
“It would contribute to the systematic, repetitive emasculation of democratic institutions and the consequent strangulation of democracy which would be gravely detrimental to the political climate and future of India,” his plea stated.