Jharkhand High Court refuses to quash 2019 defamation case against Rahul Gandhi for Modi comment

The Jharkhand High Court last week refused to quash criminal defamation proceedings against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi arising from his comment, “why do all thieves have Modi in their names?” [Rahul Gandhi v State of Jharkhand]..Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi held that the contentions have to be proved before the trial court, and the High Court was not required to come to a conclusion on the facts. The order stated,"...the Court comes to the conclusion that all the contentions are required to be proved in the trial and this Court is not required to roam into and come to the conclusion at this stage as to whether Explanation-2 of section 499 I.P.C has been proved or not.".The Court also noted that the right of reputation comes under the ambit of the right of life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India..Gandhi moved the High Court against a judicial magistrate’s order taking cognizance of a complaint by a practicing advocate, who claimed that his remarks were defamatory and humiliating.“I have a question? Why do all thieves have Modi in their names, whether it is Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, or Narendra Modi? I don’t know how many more such Modi will come out,” Rahul Gandhi was quoted as saying at a rally in Kolar, Karnataka.The complainant claimed that Gandhi had made similar remarks associating the surname ‘Modi’ with thieves on different occasions. These repeated imputations had lowered the reputation of the Modi clan in public eyes and had caused immense hurt and anguish to those with the surname, he said..Gandhi’s counsel, on the other hand, challenged the maintainability of the complaint stating that only a person who was aggrieved could maintain a criminal defamation complaint under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.It was also argued that the ingredients of the offence were not made out. Further, the complainant did not suffer any specific legal injury as Gandhi's remarks were not directed at any individual or a readily identifiable group of people, and therefore, the complaint was not maintainable, it was submitted..On examining the arguments, the single-judge found that whether or not the particular class was defamed was to be proved by leading evidence in trial.The Court took the view that the judgments cited by the Gandhi's counsel to buttress his arguments did not help his cause. Referring to one such judgment, the Court observed,"In the case in hand, the entire Modi community have been defamed by the alleged utterance of this petitioner. Thus, this judgment is not helping the petitioner."Justice Dwivedi clarified that the Court had examined the order of the trial court and concluded that it had applied its judicial mind and taken cognizance only after disclosing the prima facie materials.Therefore, the petition was dismissed..Advocate Kaushik Sarkhel appeared for Gandhi. The State was represented by Advocate Saket Kumar, while Advocates Anil Kumar Sinha and Sarvendra Kumar appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]