'Modi-Thieves' Remark| Live Updates From Gujarat HC In Rahul Gandhi's Plea Seeking Stay On Conviction In Defamation Case

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He says I am associated with BJP for 45 years and have held various posts. 

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He says in his deposition that he received the CD from the Election Commission of India lying in open condition and I am not sure from where the ECI got the CD. 

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Yaji brings the CD (containing the alleged speech) claiming that he got it through the Election Commission. 

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: This witness (Yaji) is not there in the complaint, not in the witness list, and he appears only in early 2021. He is a member of the BJP and a close associate of the Complainant.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Pendrive is not exhibited.

No 65B Evidence Act certificate was produced to support the recording.

The CD containing the alleged speech appears miraculously through one witness Yaji.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: On the day of conviction, there was no admissible evidence before Court.

1) Whatsapp message (containing alleged speech) not proved

2) Pendrive not produced, no mention of it in complaint

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: There is no evidence regarding the conduct of inquiry by the Magistrate as per Section 202 CrPC requirement.

Also, the alleged speech is not proved in the Court.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The use of the expression ‘shall’ under Sectio 202 CrPC prima facie makes the inquiry or the investigation, as the case may be, by the Magistrate mandatory.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: 202 CrPC compliance was not made by the Magistrate, and no inquiry was conducted. Yes, no judgment is required at that stage, but where is the application of mind?

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: He himself sought a stay on its own complaint, and after almost 1 year, in February 2023, he seeks vacation of the order of the Stay saying that new facts and sufficient material have come on record.

But nothing had changed meanwhile.