The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Congress MP and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, seeking to quash a 2019 summons in a defamation case over his remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whom he had termed a "commander-in-thief."
A single bench of Justice N R Borkar upheld the magistrate court's order, stating that it found no "perversity and illegality" in the lower court's decision.
"This court finds no infirmity in the order. Hence, the petition is dismissed," the High Court ruled.
Also read: October 6 by-poll sets stage for 3-months-old TVK govt's first electoral test
However, the High Court extended its 2021 relief directing the magistrate to defer hearings on the matter for six weeks, granting Gandhi time to appeal the verdict in the Supreme Court.
Background of the case
Gandhi had challenged an August 28, 2019 order issued by a Girgaum magistrate court initiating process against him. The complaint was filed by M H Shrishrimal, who identified himself as a member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The defamation complaint stems from a September 2018 public speech delivered by Gandhi in Rajasthan, where he made the "commander-in-thief" comment while targeting Prime Minister Modi over the Rafale fighter jet deal. Shrishrimal alleged that Gandhi further circulated the remarks by sharing a video on his personal X (formerly Twitter) account.
According to the complainant, these statements amounted to direct allegations of theft against all BJP members and citizens associated with the Prime Minister.
Also read: 'Four-engine govt' in Delhi a killing machine: Congress on Delhi building collapse
Legal arguments
Defending Gandhi, senior counsel Sudeep Pasbola and advocate Kushal Mor argued that the complaint was frivolous and should be dismissed because the complainant lacked locus standi. They submitted that Shrishrimal was not an aggrieved party in the matter and therefore held no legal standing to file the case.
Shrishrimal opposed Gandhi's plea in the High Court, which ultimately ruled that there was no reason to interfere with the lower court's proceedings. In November 2021, the High Court had temporarily directed the magistrate to defer the hearing, sparing the Congress leader from personal appearance until the petition was decided.
