Rahul Gandhi is sitting MP, busy attending Parliament: Jharkhand High Court exempts Gandhi from appearing in defamation case

The Jharkhand High Court on Wednesday exempted Rahul Gandhi from appearing before a special court in Ranchi in a criminal defamation case for his remark "All thieves have Modi surname" [Rahul Gandhi v. State of Jharkhand and Anr.].Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Puneet Dalmia v. Central Bureau of Investigation to conclude that exemption under Section 205 (Magistrate may dispense with personal attendance of accused) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was justified."Thus, in view of the above ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the court comes to a conclusion that prima facie it appears that the petitioner is a sitting Member of Parliament and he is busy with other works including attending the Parliament Session. Further in para-15, the terms and condition for such exemption has been stated to be complied by the petitioner by way of filing the fresh affidavit before the learned court and in view of said statement, the trial will not hamper and the case will proceed and there is justification of allowing the said petition under Section 205 Cr.P.C," the order said..The Court was hearing a challenge by Gandhi to an order of a Ranchi court that refused to exempt him from appearing in the criminal defamation case filed against him by one Pradeep Modi.Gandhi told the Court that the trial court rejected his plea on the ground that he had appeared in an identical case at another place.The Congress leader undertook that he will not dispute his identity as an accused and that his counsel will appear before the trial court on his behalf. Further, he assured the Court that he would not object to evidence being taken in his absence.Accordingly, he prayed for setting aside of the trial court order rejecting his plea under Section 205 CrPC as the case was trivial in nature..The complainant informed the Court that since Gandhi had not appeared before the trial court, it rightly rejected his plea. He underlined that Gandhi had already been convicted by a Gujarat court in a similar case. Further, he said that the application under Section 205 CrPC was filed three years after the case was initiated..The High Court highlighted that the trial court has a discretion to dispense with or even enforce the personal attendance of the accused for sufficient reasons.It said that the discretionary nature of the power under Section 205 was not in doubt, but to avoid unnecessary harassment to the accused, the trial court is required to consider the application in view of several judgments.Accordingly, it said that in view of the judgment in Bhaskar Industries, it was crystal clear that the trial court can allow the accused to make even the first appearance through a counsel..Thus, the order of the trial court was set aside and Gandhi was exempted from appearing before it in person.This, subject to his undertaking not to dispute his identity as an accused. The Court also directed his advocate to appear before the trial court on each date of hearing."There is no doubt that the petitioner is a public figure and he is required to appear in the public with very caution and such loose word is not required to be used in such a manner by a person of stature like petitioner. This is only the opinion of the court and that observation is nothing to do with the merit of the case," the Court concluded..The case against Gandhi was initiated after his speech at an election rally in Karnataka's Kolar constituency in 2019 wherein he linked Prime Minister Narendra Modi with fugitives like Nirav Modi and Lalit Modi.He had said,"Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, Narendra Modi. How come all the thieves have 'Modi' as a common surname?".Supreme Court stays conviction of Rahul Gandhi in defamation case for remark on Modi surname.Advocates Kaushik Sarkhel, Deepankar and Abhishek Singh appeared for Gandhi. Advocate MK Roy represented the State, while Advocate Sarvendra Kumar appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]