Gujarat court finds Rahul Gandhi guilty: What is the 2019 defamation case against him?

BJP MLA and former Gujarat minister Purnesh Modi had filed a complaint against Gandhi. Purnesh Modi was a minister in the first tenure of the Bhupendra Patel government and is an MLA from the Surat West Assembly. Congress party functionaries assembled in Surat in a show of strength and support for Gandhi.

What is the defamation case against Gandhi?

The court had last week concluded hearing final arguments from both sides, Gandhi’s lawyer Kirit Panwala had said. Gandhi last appeared before the Surat court in the case in October 2021 to record his statement, according to a PTI report.

The Gujarat High Court had stayed the proceedings in March 2022 after Modi moved a petition seeking a stay on the proceedings, primarily on the ground of lack of sufficient evidence. Advocate Harshit Tolia, representing Modi, then said, “We have now withdrawn the petition following sufficient evidence coming on the court’s record.” They said CDs and a pen drive contained the alleged material.

The final arguments resumed last month after the High Court vacated its stay on proceedings, imposed on a plea by the complainant demanding Gandhi’s personal appearance.

Meanwhile, Gandhi’s lawyer previously argued the court proceedings were “flawed” from the beginning as the procedure laid down under section 202 of the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) was not followed. The CrPC section deals with the postponement of issue of process.

The lawyer also argued that Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and not Purnesh Modi, should have been the complainant in the case because the PM was the main target of Gandhi’s speech. The case was filed under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 499 and 500, dealing with defamation.

How does a conviction impact Rahul Gandhi?

The disqualification of an MP convicted for an offence can happen in two instances. First, if the offence for which he is convicted is listed in Section 8(1) of the Representation of the People Act of 1951.

This includes offences such as section 153A (offence of promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) or section 171E (offence of bribery) or section 171F (offence of undue influence or personation at an election) and a few others.

And second, if the lawmaker is convicted for any other offence but is sentenced for a period of two years or more. Section 8(3) of the RPA mandates that an MP can be disqualified if convicted and sentenced to not less than 2 years of imprisonment.

However, the section also states that the disqualification takes effect only “after three months have elapsed” from the date of conviction. Within that period, Gandhi can file an appeal against the sentence before the High Court.

What do IPC sections 499 and 500 say?

Defamation is a wrong that deals with damage caused to a person’s reputation.

In India, defamation can both be a civil wrong and a criminal offence, depending on the objective they seek to achieve. A civil wrong sees a wrong being redressed with monetary compensation, while a criminal law seeks to punish a wrongdoer and send a message to others not to commit such acts, with a jail term. In a criminal case, defamation has to be established beyond reasonable doubt but in a civil defamation suit, damages can be awarded based on probabilities.

Section 499 of the IPC defines what amounts to criminal defamation and subsequent provisions define its punishment. Section 499 elaborates on how defamation could be through words – spoken or intended to be read, through signs, and also through visible representations. These can either be published or spoken about a person with the intention of damaging reputation of that person, or with the knowledge or reason to believe that the imputation will harm his reputation.

Section 500 stipulates imprisonment of up to two years, with or without a fine, for someone held guilty of criminal defamation.

(With PTI inputs)