Courts Cannot Rewrite Contracts or Dictate Economic Policy: Supreme Court Strikes Down Madras HC’s Intervention in Formula 4 Racing Event Advocates Must Uphold Integrity; Mere Name Lending Without Active Participation Amounts to Misconduct: Supreme Court Contempt Jurisdiction Should Protect Justice, Not Judges' Personal Dignity: PH High Court Reaffirms Limits of Criminal Contempt Amendments to KPBR 2019 Ensure Compliance in Church Construction: Kerala High Court Dismisses Challenges Mere Allegation of Fraud Without Specific Pleadings and Evidence Cannot Reopen a Concluded Judgment: Delhi High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Petitions Alleging Police Harassment and Seeking Protection for Whistle-blowers Violations of Conditions Will Not Be Tolerated: Kerla High Court Cancels Bail, Citing Threats to Victim Public Infrastructure Cannot Be Altered for Private Convenience Without Compelling Reasons: Punjab and Haryana High Court Refused To Relocation of Foot Over Bridge Accident Claim | Compensation Must Be Just, Not a Mere Mathematical Exercise –  Must Reflect Real Hardships: Supreme Court Accident Claim | Compensation Must Reflect the True Impact of Disability on One’s Life and Livelihood: Supreme Court Accident Claim | Compensation for Foreign Earnings Must Reflect Exchange Rate on Date of Claim Petition: Supreme Court A Conviction Under Section 366A IPC Cannot Stand Without Conclusive Proof That the Victim Was a Minor:  Supreme Court Integrity of a Public Servant Must Be Beyond Suspicion: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Former Indian Airlines Official for Forgery and Corruption Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Supreme Court Stays Conviction of Rahul Gandhi - Lack of Reasons for Maximum Sentence"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has granted interim relief to Rahul Gandhi, staying his conviction in a criminal case. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar on 4th August 2023.

The case in question pertains to Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 8644/2023 filed by Rahul Gandhi against the impugned judgment and order dated 7th July 2023 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The High Court had dismissed the revision petition filed by Rahul Gandhi, challenging the order of the learned Sessions Judge, which rejected his prayer for stay of conviction.

The Court noted that the Trial Judge had awarded the maximum sentence of two years' imprisonment to Rahul Gandhi without providing any reasons for such a decision. This raised concerns as it triggered the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which can result in disqualification from public office.

"Though the learned Appellate Court and the learned High Court have spent voluminous pages while rejecting the application for stay of conviction, these aspects have not even been touched in their orders," the Court observed in its judgment.

Furthermore, the Court emphasized the importance of restraint in public speeches for individuals in public life, referring to previous proceedings against Rahul Gandhi in contempt cases. However, it noted that the absence of reasons for imposing the maximum sentence of two years required consideration

"We are of the considered view that the ramification of subsection (3) of Section 8 of the Act are wide-ranging. They not only affect the right of the appellant to continue in public life but also affect the right of the electorate, who have elected him, to represent their constituency," the Court stated.

Taking into account the potential consequences and the lack of reasons for the maximum sentence, the Supreme Court stayed the order of conviction during the pendency of the appeal. It, however, clarified that the pendency of the appeal would not hinder the Appellate Court from proceeding further with the appeal on its merits.

"The parties would be at liberty to approach the learned Appellate Court for expeditious disposal of the appeal, which request would be considered by it, on its own merits," the Court added.

The stay on Rahul Gandhi's conviction has sparked discussions and debates among legal experts and political commentators, given the significance of the case in terms of its impact on public officeholders. The Appellate Court will now proceed with the appeal to decide on the merits of the case in due course.

Date of Decision: 04-08-2023

RAHUL GANDHI  vs PURNESH ISHWARBHAI MODI & ANR.  

Similar News