The Surat sessions court on Thursday rejected Rahul Gandhi’s appeal seeking a stay and suspension of the lower court order which convicted him in the 2019 defamation case.
There could be a long legal battle in future. Rahul should have been more careful the Judge opined.This is massive blow for Rahul.
Last Thursday, the court of Additional Sessions Judge RP Mogera had reserved its verdict for April 20 on Gandhi’s application for a stay, pending his appeal against a lower court’s order sentencing him to two years in jail in the case.
Arguing for Gandhi’s plea for a stay on conviction, his lawyer had told the court that the trial in the case was “not fair” and there was no need for maximum punishment in the case.
In his submission, Gandhi had said if the March 23 judgment of the trial court is not suspended and stayed, it will cause irreparable damage to his reputation.
He said the excessive sentence is contrary to the law on the subject and unwarranted in the present case which has overriding political overtones.
Gandhi termed his conviction as “erroneous” and “patently perverse” and said the trial court treated him harshly after being overwhelmingly influenced by his status as an MP. The Congress leader said he was sentenced in a manner so as to attract the order of disqualification because the trial court was well aware of his status as a parliamentarian.
The bye-election once held in Gandhi’s Lok Sabha constituency due to his disqualification cannot be undone if his conviction has not stayed even if the court subsequently acquits him, he said. Such an election will also cause irreparable loss to the state exchequer, he said. Opposing his plea, MLA Modi had told the court that Gandhi is a repeat offender with several criminal defamation proceedings against him going on in different courts across the country.
He said the way Gandhi came to file his appeal showed extraordinary arrogance and a very dirty display of childish arrogance and an immature act of bringing pressure upon the court.
The accused is in the habit of making such defamatory and irresponsible statements which may either defame others or may hurt the feelings of others, in the name of freedom of speech and political criticism and dissent, Purnesh Modi stated in his affidavit.
