This is an archive article published on July 16, 2024
2014 RSS defamation case: Complainant left no stone unturned to thwart Rahul Gandhi’s legitimate right to speedy trial, says Bombay HC
An RSS functionary had alleged that Rahul Gandhi had tarnished the reputation of the RSS by saying that it was behind the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.
Addressing an election rally on March 6, 2014, in Thane district, Rahul Gandhi, who was the then Congress vice-president, purportedly alleged that the RSS was behind the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. (File)
While allowing Rahul Gandhi’s plea against the Bhiwandi magistrate court order permitting an RSS functionary to “belatedly” produce certain documents in a criminal defamation complaint, the Bombay High Court has said the complainant was “keeping no stone unturned to thwart the Congress leader’s “legitimate right” to “speedy trial”.
A single-judge bench of Justice Prithviraj K Chavan on July 12 passed a verdict that quashed and set aside a magistrate court order, a detailed copy of which was made available on Tuesday.
Addressing an election rally on March 6, 2014, in Thane district, Rahul Gandhi, who was the then Congress vice-president, purportedly alleged that the RSS was behind the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. Rajesh Kunte, in his defamation complaint, alleged that Rahul tarnished the reputation of the RSS.
Rahul, through advocates Sudeep Pasbola and Kushal Mor, had claimed that the issue had been covered by the September 2021 order of another bench of the high court that dismissed the plea by RSS functionary Rajesh Kunte seeking the transcript of the 2014 speech made by Rahul. Despite the said orders, Rahul argued that the magistrate allowed Kunte to show the same documents during proceedings.
A division bench led by Justice Revati Mohite-Dere then noted that the transcript cannot be said to be a “public document”. She added that an accused has the right to “remain silent” under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution and the same is “sacrosanct” in a criminal trial.
In light of the 2021 verdict, Justice Chavan observed that “it appeared from the overall conduct of Kunte that the matter is being unnecessarily delayed and protracted”.
The bench noted, “It can thus be seen that the respondent (Kunte) is keeping no stone unturned to thwart the legitimate right of the petitioner to get the complaint decided on merits as expeditiously as possible in view of Article 21 of the Constitution which provides speedy trial. It is difficult to abstruse the conduct of the respondent. Free and fair trial is a sine qua non of Article 21 of the Constitution. It is trite law that justice should not only be done but it should be seen to have been done.”
Story continues below this ad
Referring to a past Supreme Court verdict, Justice Chavan noted, “Essence of the judgment is that a criminal trial should be free and fair, unbiased and should not be such as would shake the confidence of the public at large.”
The high court held that the “magistrate court appears to have completely disregarded the cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence while exhibiting the annexures” and was also “in violation of the orders” passed by the High Court in September 2021 and June 2022.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
3 min read
