Modi surname case: The defamation suit against Rahul Gandhi explained

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi must be an anxious man today. Why? Because today (7 July) is when it the Gujarat High Court will pronounce its verdict on the review petition filed seeking a stay on his conviction in the Modi surname defamation case.

Justice Hemant Prachchhak of the Gujarat High Court is expected to deliver his verdict in the matter at 11 am, reported news agency PTI. If the stay is granted, it will pave a way for Rahul Gandhi to return to Parliament as an MP.

But what was this case all about? Why is it important for Rahul Gandhi that the court grants a stay on the conviction? Here’s a full recap of the defamation case.

What’s the case?

In 2019, Purnesh Modi – a BJP MLA and ex-Gujarat minister – had filed a defamation case, under IPC sections 499, 500 and 504, against the former Congress party chief, Rahul Gandhi, for a comment that he made during at a campaign during the 2019 Lok Sabha general elections.

The case stated that Gandhi at an election rally at Kolar in Karnataka on April 13, 2019 had said, “Why all the thieves, be it Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi or Narendra Modi, have Modi in their names”.

The complainant held that Gandhi had defamed all people whose surname is Modi. According to rough estimates, there are about 130 million people in India who carry the surname.

On 10 October of that year, Rahul Gandhi appeared before the court and pleaded not guilty in the matter. In March 2022, the Gujarat High Court had stayed the proceedings in the case after the complainant sought a stay citing lack of sufficient evidence.

The stay was then lifted in February this year after Purnesh Modi told the High Court that there was sufficient evidence such as CDs and pen drives that had come on record of the trial court.

During the course of the case, Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer, Babu Mangukiya, argued that it should have been Prime Minister Narendra Modi and not Purnesh Modi to have been the complainant in the matter as the prime minister was the main target of the Congress leader’s speech.

On 23 March, this year, Surat’s court found Gandhi guilty of defamation and sentenced him to two years in prison. The court approved Gandhi’s bail on a surety of Rs 15,000 and suspended the sentence for 30 days to allow him to appeal.

The two-year sentence led to the disqualification of Gandhi, an MP from Kerala’s Wayanad, under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.

The verdict also led to mass protests by Congress workers, opposing the verdict with several leaders slamming the decision. Multiple Opposition leaders also chimed in, with AAP leader and Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal accusing the BJP of trying to “eliminate non-BJP leaders and parties by prosecuting them”.

However, the BJP welcomed the decision and Ravi Shankar Prasad told a press conference: “The law of India is that if an individual or an organisation has been defamed by defamatory comments, abuses, then he has got the right to seek address but Congress has an objection to it. They want complete freedom for Rahul Gandhi to utter abuses”.

What happened next?

Following the verdict, Gandhi approached the Surat Sessions Court in April 2023, seeking suspension of sentencing and a stay on the conviction pending his appeal. However, the sessions court granted him bail but refused to stay the conviction.

Gandhi then approached the high court with senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi telling the court that the trial was vitiated and the conviction did not fall under the category of moral turpitude or a serious offense as defined in various judgments.

Moreover, Singhvi argued that a maximum punishment of two years for a bailable, non-cognisable offence meant his client could lose his Lok Sabha seat “permanently and irreversibly”, which was a “very serious additional irreversible consequence to the person and the constituency he represents”.

A report by The Indian Express also said that Singhvi had stated that by denying the plea in such a case of alleged criminal defamation, the court will be “rewriting” the scope of CrPC Section 389.

What about other cases?

Incidentally, this is not the only Modi defamation case that Rahul Gandhi is facing. Advocate Pradeep Modi from Ranchi has filed a defamation case against the Congress leader, seeking damages worth Rs 20 crore for his comment that is perceived as being anti-Modi.

Pradeep Modi in his petition claimed that while addressing a rally in Morabadi in Ranchi during the 2019 Lok Sabha election, Gandhi had referred to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, businessman Nirav Modi and Lalit Modi that “why all persons bearing the surname Modi are thieves.”

The Jharkhand court has quashed the petition asking the Congress leader to be physically present and on 4 July also ordered that no coercive action should be taken against him.

Besides these Modi defamation cases, there are other cases also filed against Rahul Gandhi. One of them was filed in 2019 by BJP municipal councillor from Ahmedabad, Krishnavadan Brahmbhatt. The matter relates to Rahul allegedly referring to Union Home Minister Amit Shah as a “murder accused” during a Lok Sabha campaign speech in Jabalpur.

A case was filed against Rahul based on a 23 June 2018, tweet saying: “Congratulations Amit Shah ji, Director of Ahmedabad District Co-operative Bank, on your bank winning first prize in the conversion of old notes to new race. Rs 750 crore in five days! Millions of Indians whose lives were destroyed by demonetisation salute your achievement! #ShahZyadaKhaGaya”.

With inputs from agencies