Gujarat Court To Pronounce Verdict On Rahul Gandhi’s Defamatory Remarks On PM Modi

A court in Gujarat’s Surat city is expected to pass an order on March 23 in a criminal defamation lawsuit against Congress MP Rahul Gandhi over his alleged “Modi surname” statement, his lawyer stated on Monday.

According to lawyer Kirit Panwala, the Congress leader would be present in court when the ruling will be passed.

On a complaint registered by BJP Legislator and former Gujarat minister Purnesh Modi, the case was lodged against Rahul Gandhi for his alleged “how come all the thieves have Modi as the common surname?” remark.

According to the complaint, the controversial comment was made during a rally in Kolar, Karnataka, ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, and it defamed the whole Modi community.

According to lawyers, the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, H.H Varma ended hearing closing arguments from both parties last Friday and scheduled March, 23 as the date to declare the ruling.

“On March 23, the court adjourned the hearing in the criminal defamation case and scheduled a decision. Rahul Gandhi will be present in court when the order is passed,” Kirit Panwala said.

Rahul Gandhi has been in court three times throughout the hearing of the case. He last appeared in court in October 2021 to record his statement, and he pleaded not guilty.

The final arguments in the defamation case commenced in February, 2023, after the Gujarat High Court lifted the interim stay put on proceedings in March, 2022 on the complainant’s plea for Rahul Gandhi’s personal appearance.

Purnesh Modi, the complainant, was a minister of Gujarat during the first term of the Bhupendra Patel government. In the December 2022 elections, he was re-elected to the Surat West assembly seat.

The complainant’s lawyer contended that CDs and a pen drive of Rahul Gandhi’s speech indicate that he made the comment during the rally and that his words defamed the Modi community.

Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer contended that the hearing was flawed from the start as the legal procedure since section 202 of the CrPC was not followed.

He further contended that the complainant in the case as an aggrieved party should have been Prime Minister Narendra Modi, not Purnesh Modi, because the majority of Rahul Gandhi’s speech was targeted at the prime minister.