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

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Supreme Court order (Rafale case) was delivered on 14-11-2019 and the alleged statement was made on 13-4-2019, it is an apparent error of the court asking him to be retrospectively careful

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The Judge says that he bases his case on the ground that I (Gandhi) was admonished by the Supreme Court in the Rafale case and was asked to be more careful and since you were warned there, your error here is more. this is direct finding

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Complainant says that the Accused (Rahul Gandhi) didn't take his name. If everyone from the unidentifiable community is allowed to file case then 499 IPC and 199 CrPC will have no meaning.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: Prime Minister is not involved in the case, he has not filed the case. He is certainly an identifiable class.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi now cites cases concerning 'much more identifiable and much much narrower, much much smaller classes' communities which were held to be indeterminate.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The complainant forms a trust related to the Modi community in 2015 named 'Modi Samast Gujarat Samaj' and says before the Court that I don't have anything else other than the letter head of that trust (which he himself created) that there exists a modi community.

Sr. Adv. Singhvi: The complainant in his deposition says "It is true Modi surname doesn't mean that it belongs to a certain community" 

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites the following paragraph from the 1984 ruling of the Gujarat High Court case in Narottamdas L. Shah vs Patel Maganbhai Revabhai And Anr. 

Sr. Adv. Singhvi cites the following paragraph from the 2016 ruling of Apex Court in Subramanian Swamy vs Union Of India, Min. Of Law

Sr. Adv. Singhvi (citing a case): Where writing weighs against mankind in general or against a particular order of men, men of their own, it is no libel.