According to the petition, the verdict, order of conviction, and sentence were invalid in law and went against the preponderance of the evidence.
Digital Desk: Rahul Gandhi has requested a stay of his conviction for remarking the Modi surname, and a Surat sessions court has reserved its decision. After hearing from each party's lawyer, the court reserved its decision.
On April 20, the court will issue its decision.
Judge RP Mogera of the Additional Sessions Court heard opening statements from both sides on Thursday. To challenge the judgment, Gandhi filed an appeal with Judge Mogera.
Rahul Gandhi was found guilty in a criminal defamation lawsuit against him for his alleged statement about the "Modi surname," which he has called "erroneous" and perverse in his appeal. The court has handed down a two-year prison term for him.
According to IPC Section 500, Rahul Gandhi was found guilty. Under this provision, a two-year prison sentence is a maximum penalty.
Later, the former Wayanad MP was disqualified from serving as a Lok Sabha MP.
What grounds did Rahul Gandhi use to oppose his conviction decision?
Rahul Gandhi claimed he had good grounds to think that from the beginning, he had been put through a procedure that did not meet the criteria for a fair trial.
Gandhi alleged that he was the victim of an unjust trial, which was unquestionably the consequence of a malicious prosecution. The verdict is consequently unjustified and cannot stand up to scrutiny.
According to the petition, the verdict, order of conviction, and sentence were invalid in law and went against the preponderance of the evidence.
The petition further emphasised that the trial court should have noticed that -
• the evidence of the witness is not believable
• the documents on record are not properly proven and are not admissible
• the complainant was not an aggrieved person and had no right to file the complaint
The petition contended that the complainant does not have the authority to bring the case just because his last name included the word "Modi."
"Modi is not a well-defined, identifiable, definite, determinate group of persons. There are Modis in every community. There is no organisation of persons having the surname Modi. There is no particular group of Modis which is referred in the impugned defamatory statement as distinguished from the rest of the Modis," the petition stated.
Leave A Comment