Order reaffirms public faith in apex court

THE Supreme Court’s order staying the conviction of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in the ‘Modi surname’ defamation case must be welcomed, for it reaffirms public faith in an institution considered to be the custodian of democracy in India. The order shows that the apex court is not oblivious to politicians using the defamation law as a tool to settle scores with their rivals. Such cases have a ‘chilling effect’ on free speech, which is a sine qua non of democracy. To start with, the Surat court’s March 23 verdict was wrong inasmuch as it convicted Rahul for a political statement against an ‘unidentifiable’ group. But even if the conviction order were taken to be correct, awarding the maximum sentence of two-year imprisonment in a criminal defamation case to a person having no criminal antecedents was unjustified.

The top court rightly pointed out that no specific reason was given by the trial judge to impose the maximum sentence. Had the quantum of sentence been even a day less, it would not have attracted provisions of the Representation of the People Act necessitating his immediate disqualification. Imposing the maximum sentence for defamation — a bailable, non-cognisable and compoundable offence — was unwarranted. The failure of the Surat Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court to correct the trial court’s order to award the maximum sentence was glaring.

The Supreme Court has undone the damage, though it did observe that Rahul’s utterances were not in ‘good taste’ and a person in public life ought to be more careful while making speeches. Even as Rahul is set to get back his Lok Sabha membership, there is a cautionary lesson here for politicians to not go overboard while criticising their rivals.