Gujarat Court Grants Rahul Gandhi Permanent Exemption From Court Appearance In Defamation Case [Read Order]

The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate R. B. Etaliya allowed Gandhi's plea seeking permanent exemption from appearance in the criminal defamation case.

The Case against Rahul Gandhi

It may be noted that while addressing an election rally in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh (before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections), Rahul Gandhi had called Amit Shah, a "murder accused". He further said, "Waah kya shaan hai!!"

In the present case, BJP corporator Krishnavadan Brahmbhatt filed a complaint that the slur used by Gandhi was slanderous as Shah was discharged in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh fake encounter case in 2015.

In January 2020, Gandhi appeared before the court and pleaded `not guilty''. Thereafter, he was granted bail.

Plea for Permanent exemption

On Tuesday, the Lawyer appearing for Rahul Gandhi, P. S. Champaneri submitted before the Court that his Client Rahul Gandhi is a leader of a national political party and had a busy schedule, due to which it wouldn't be possible for him to appear before the Court to face the trial in the Case.

It may be noted that in September 2019, Rahul Gandhi had raised this plea for the first time and had sought permanent exemption from appearance before the court.

After that, hearing on this plea of Rahul Gandhi was delayed first due to adjournments sought by the lawyer for the complainant, BJP corporator Krishnavadan Brahmbhatt.

Thereafter, when Brahmbhatt's lawyer S V Raju was appointed Additional Solicitor General of India, and on account of this, he required the permission of the Union Ministry of Law and Justice to appear in the case for BJP corporator Krishnavadan Brahmbhatt, it caused further delay.

Court's order

The Lawyer appearing for the Accused, Rahul Gandhi submitted before the Court that it is not possible for him to attend day-to day Court proceedings as he is a national leader and has a busy schedule.

He also argued before the Court that it will cause him undue hardship if he is forced to appear on each and every hearing in the case and that he should be allowed to appear through his pleader and he be granted permanent exemption from court appearance in the case.

The Metropolitan Court, after examining the ratio of the Judgments in the Case of M/S. Bhaskar Industries Ltd v. M/S. Bhiwani Denim & Apparels Ltd. (2001) 7 SCC 401 [Supreme Court], Jayantilal Chhaganlal Panchal v. Shirish Shantilal Pandya And Anr (1986) 1 GLR 287 [Gujarat High Court], TGN Kumar vs State Of Kerala & Ors [(2011) 2 SCC 772] [Supreme Court] and Bhaskar Sen vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. 2005 (1) ALD Cri 11 [Bombay High Court], came to the conclusion that discretion could be exercised in favour of Accused Rahul Gandhi and thus, he was granted permanent exemption from personal appearance before the Court.

Speaking to Live Law, the Lawyer of Rahul Gandhi, Advocate P. S. Champaneri also confirmed that the Court was of the view that Rahul Gandhi could be given the pleaded exemption and to arrive at this conclusion, the Court also took into account the provisions of Section 205 and 317 of CrPC.

Advocate P. S. Champaneri also told Live Law, that the Case being a summons case, Rahul Gandhi can very well appear either personally or through his pleader, subject to the discretion of the Court and in the case at hand, the discretion was exercised in Rahul Gandhi's favour.

He further told that in view of Section 273 of CrPC, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding has to be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader.

Therefore, he concluded that in the present case, since the Court has now dispensed with the personal attendance of Rahul Gandhi, now the evidence can be recorded in the presence of his Pleader.

Significantly, the Court has granted him permanent exemption from personal appearance on the following conditions:-

· The Accused will not dispute his identity

· The Advocate of the Accused will remain present before the Court on each and every hearing and he shall not ask for adjournments

· The Advocate of the Accused will keep on taking necessary instructions from the Accused from time to time for the purpose of conduct of trial

[With inputs from PTI and Advocate P. S. Champaneri]