Rahul Gandhi Gets Bail In Savarkar Defamation Case; Pune Court Refuses To Injunct Him From Speaking Against Savarkar

After Congress leader Rahul Gandhi appeared virtually before a Special Court in Pune, to attend the proceedings related to the defamation complaint filed against him for allegedly defaming late right-wing leader Vinayak Savarkar by making objectionable comments against him in a speech he delivered in the United Kingdom, the court granted him bail in the case.

Special MP/MLA Judge Amol Shinde also refused to impose a 'permanent injunction' against Gandhi from making any speech or comments, against Savarkar. 

A detailed copy of the order is yet to be made available.

Confirming the development, Gandhi's counsel Milind Pawar told Live Law, "Pursuant to earlier order, my client was supposed to appear before the court on Friday but I apprised the court of the fact that my client is the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the Parliament and thus has high security and therefore coming here personally would not be feasible. I sought permission for my client to appear virtually and the court agreed. Mr Gandhi, then appeared through video conferencing facility and was before the court for more than 20 minutes."

The counsel, thereafter furnished a bail application which the court allowed. "The court allowed bail for my client on a surety of Rs 25,000. A former MLA Mohan Joshi, stood surety for Mr Gandhi," Pawar informed. 

Further, the court also allowed the application made by Pawar to grant permanent exemption to Gandhi from appearing before the court. He said that Gandhi would now appear personally before the court only at the time when the court will pronounce its judgment in the case.

According to Pawar, the complainant had moved applications - one for initiating contempt of court (as Gandhi did not appear before the court despite clear orders), one for issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) - both of which were turned down by the court. 

"An oral request of the opponent lawyer to pass a permanent injunction against Gandhi from making any comment on Savarkar, too was rejected citing the right to freedom of speech," Pawar added. 

Background:

The defamation complaint asserts that Gandhi has repeatedly defamed Savarkar on various occasions over the years. One specific incident highlighted was on March 5, 2023, when Gandhi addressed the Overseas Congress in the United Kingdom.

The complainant has claimed that Gandhi made intentionally wild allegations against Savarkar, knowing them to be untrue, with the intention of harming Savarkar's reputation and causing mental agony to the complainant and his family. The complaint states that the defamatory speech was delivered in England, but its impact was felt in Pune as it was published and circulated throughout India.

Savarkar, in his complaint, has submitted several news reports and a YouTube link to a video of Gandhi's speech in London as evidence. He has claimed that Gandhi falsely accused Savarkar of writing a book in which he described beating up a Muslim person, which Savarkar never wrote and such an incident never happened. Satyaki argued that Gandhi made these false, malicious, and wild allegations with the specific objective of defaming Savarkar and harming his reputation.

The criminal defamation application filed by Satyaki demands maximum punishment for Gandhi under Section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of the IPC and seeks imposition of maximum compensation as per Section 357 (Order to pay compensation) of the CrPC.