<p>In a big relief to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, the Supreme Court on Friday stayed his conviction in a defamation case for his 2019 remarks at Kolar rally where he asked why all thieves had the 'Modi surname', paving the way for restoration of his status as Member of Parliament.</p>.<p>The top court, however, said his alleged utterance was not in good taste and he ought to have been more careful while making the public speech.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices B R Gavai, P S Narasimha, and Sanjay Kumar said the trial court had not given any reason for awarding him the maximum sentence of two years, which led to his disqualification as an MP under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act.</p>.<p>"Particularly, when an offence is non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable, the least that the trial judge was expected to do was to give some reasons as to why, in the facts and circumstances, he found it necessary to impose the maximum sentence of two years," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court also pointed out the disqualification was incurred by Gandhi because of the two year sentence only.</p>.<p><strong>Also read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/karnataka-politics/zero-tolerance-for-corruption-rahul-gandhi-tells-karnataka-leaders-1243297.html">Zero tolerance for corruption: Rahul Gandhi tells Karnataka leaders</a></strong></p>.<p>"Though the appellate (sessions) court and the High Court have spent voluminous pages while rejecting the application for stay of conviction, these aspects have not even been touched in their orders," it said.</p>.<p>The court also noted the disqualification of Gandhi as the MP from Wayanad constituency in Kerala has affected not only his right but that of the entire electorate.</p>.<p>"We are of the considered view that the ramification of sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the Representation of People Act are wide-ranging. They not only affect the right of the appellant to continue in public life but also affect the right of the electorate, who have elected him, to represent their constituency," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court specifically pointed out since no reason had been given by the trial judge for imposing the maximum sentence, which has the effect of incurring disqualification, except the previous admonishment to Gandhi by the Supreme Court in Rafale case in 2019, the order of conviction needs to be stayed, pending hearing of the appeal.</p>.<p>In its order, the bench said, "No doubt that the alleged utterances by the appellant are not in good taste. A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of restraint while making public speeches."</p>.<p>The court said, Gandhi ought to have been more careful while making the public speech, particularly after his unconditional apology in Rafale case in 2019, when he attributed his remark "Chaukidar (Prime Minister Narendra Modi) Chor hai" to the Supreme Court.</p>.<p>"Maybe, had the judgement of the apex court in the contempt proceedings come prior to the speech made by the appellant, the appellant would have been more careful and exercised a degree of restraint while making the alleged remarks, which were found to be defamatory by the trial judge," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court's order came after hearing senior advocates A M Singhvi and Mahesh Jethmalani, on behalf of Gandhi and complainant BJP MLA Purnesh Modi respectively.</p>.<p>The bench said though the counsels had touched upon the merits of the matter, it would refrain from making any comment as it may affect the rights of the parties in appeal.</p>.<p>Gandhi challenged the Gujarat High Court's July 7 decision declining his plea for a stay on the conviction relying upon "extraneous and irrelevant factors" like pendency of similar cases against him. </p>.<p>On March 23, 2023, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat had held Gandhi guilty for the offence of defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC and awarded him the maximum two-year jail term. His sentence, however, was suspended pending his appeal before a sessions court.</p>.<p>Gandhi, for his part, had justified his statement, saying he has the right to criticise and comment upon the measures undertaken by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is his political opponent, and merely because he was critical or he had a different opinion, the complaint for defamation could not be sustained against him.</p>
<p>In a big relief to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, the Supreme Court on Friday stayed his conviction in a defamation case for his 2019 remarks at Kolar rally where he asked why all thieves had the 'Modi surname', paving the way for restoration of his status as Member of Parliament.</p>.<p>The top court, however, said his alleged utterance was not in good taste and he ought to have been more careful while making the public speech.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices B R Gavai, P S Narasimha, and Sanjay Kumar said the trial court had not given any reason for awarding him the maximum sentence of two years, which led to his disqualification as an MP under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act.</p>.<p>"Particularly, when an offence is non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable, the least that the trial judge was expected to do was to give some reasons as to why, in the facts and circumstances, he found it necessary to impose the maximum sentence of two years," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court also pointed out the disqualification was incurred by Gandhi because of the two year sentence only.</p>.<p><strong>Also read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/karnataka-politics/zero-tolerance-for-corruption-rahul-gandhi-tells-karnataka-leaders-1243297.html">Zero tolerance for corruption: Rahul Gandhi tells Karnataka leaders</a></strong></p>.<p>"Though the appellate (sessions) court and the High Court have spent voluminous pages while rejecting the application for stay of conviction, these aspects have not even been touched in their orders," it said.</p>.<p>The court also noted the disqualification of Gandhi as the MP from Wayanad constituency in Kerala has affected not only his right but that of the entire electorate.</p>.<p>"We are of the considered view that the ramification of sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the Representation of People Act are wide-ranging. They not only affect the right of the appellant to continue in public life but also affect the right of the electorate, who have elected him, to represent their constituency," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court specifically pointed out since no reason had been given by the trial judge for imposing the maximum sentence, which has the effect of incurring disqualification, except the previous admonishment to Gandhi by the Supreme Court in Rafale case in 2019, the order of conviction needs to be stayed, pending hearing of the appeal.</p>.<p>In its order, the bench said, "No doubt that the alleged utterances by the appellant are not in good taste. A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of restraint while making public speeches."</p>.<p>The court said, Gandhi ought to have been more careful while making the public speech, particularly after his unconditional apology in Rafale case in 2019, when he attributed his remark "Chaukidar (Prime Minister Narendra Modi) Chor hai" to the Supreme Court.</p>.<p>"Maybe, had the judgement of the apex court in the contempt proceedings come prior to the speech made by the appellant, the appellant would have been more careful and exercised a degree of restraint while making the alleged remarks, which were found to be defamatory by the trial judge," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court's order came after hearing senior advocates A M Singhvi and Mahesh Jethmalani, on behalf of Gandhi and complainant BJP MLA Purnesh Modi respectively.</p>.<p>The bench said though the counsels had touched upon the merits of the matter, it would refrain from making any comment as it may affect the rights of the parties in appeal.</p>.<p>Gandhi challenged the Gujarat High Court's July 7 decision declining his plea for a stay on the conviction relying upon "extraneous and irrelevant factors" like pendency of similar cases against him. </p>.<p>On March 23, 2023, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat had held Gandhi guilty for the offence of defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC and awarded him the maximum two-year jail term. His sentence, however, was suspended pending his appeal before a sessions court.</p>.<p>Gandhi, for his part, had justified his statement, saying he has the right to criticise and comment upon the measures undertaken by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is his political opponent, and merely because he was critical or he had a different opinion, the complaint for defamation could not be sustained against him.</p>
