SC halts defamation case against Rahul Gandhi over Amit Shah-remarks

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Gandhi, argued that only the aggrieved person could file a criminal defamation case, not a proxy party, halting proceedings

The Supreme Court on Monday temporarily halted the criminal proceedings against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in connection with a defamation case filed by BJP worker Navin Jha. The case was triggered by Gandhi’s alleged remarks against Union Home Minister Amit Shah and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

 

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard a special leave petition (SLP) filed by Gandhi, challenging the Jharkhand High Court’s decision to dismiss his plea to quash the defamation case. The case originates from remarks Gandhi made during a public speech in Chaibasa in Jharkhand ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, where he allegedly referred to Amit Shah as a “murderer”.

 

 

Background of the ‘criminal case’

Navin Jha, a BJP worker, filed the complaint in 2019, leading to the initiation of legal proceedings. Initially, a magistrate court in Ranchi dismissed Jha’s complaint, prompting him to file a revision petition before the Judicial Commissioner in Ranchi. On September 15, 2018, the Judicial Commissioner overturned the dismissal, ordering the magistrate to review the evidence and issue a fresh order.

 

Following this, the magistrate found sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of defamation against Gandhi under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to criminal defamation. As a result, a summons was issued for Gandhi's appearance in court.

 

Gandhi then challenged the order in the Jharkhand High Court, but a single-judge bench led by Justice Ambuj Nath rejected his petition, stating that his remarks were “prima facie defamatory” under Section 499 of the IPC. Justice Nath’s order noted that Gandhi’s statements about BJP leaders and their acceptance of a murder accused as a party president could be considered defamatory.

 

Supreme Court’s intervention

During Monday’s hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Gandhi, argued that only the aggrieved person could file a criminal defamation case, not a proxy party. The Supreme Court granted a four-week period for Jha and the Jharkhand government to respond to Singhvi’s argument, effectively putting the proceedings on hold for now.

 

[With agency inputs]