Explained: why was rahul gandhi's plea for stay on conviction in defamation case dismissed

Surat Court has rejected Rahul Gandhi's request on Thursday, saying he must have been "more careful with his words" given that he was a member of parliament. Rahul Gandhi,

Congress leader, had requested a stay of conviction in a defamation lawsuit that resulted in his exclusion as a member of the Lok Sabha. However, Gujarat's Surat court, rejected his

request on Thursday, saying he must have been "more careful with his words" given that he was a member of parliament and the leader of the nation's second-largest party at the

time. Gandhi's request for a stay of execution in a 2019 defamation action over his "Modi surname" statement was denied by Additional Sessions Judge RP Mogera's court. A

"high standard of morality" is required from someone like Rahul Gandhi, the court decided, adding that the punishment given by the trial court was appropriate. In the case brought

by BJP MLA Purnesh Modi, the city magistrate court in this city found Gandhi guilty of criminal insult under sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him to two years in

prison on March 23. Gandhi has been declared disqualified the next day in accordance with the Representation of the People Act. Gandhi's removal or disqualification as an MP under

section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, was not deemed to be an irreparable loss or injury, the sessions court noted in its ruling on Thursday. "Any defamatory words

coming from the mouth of appellant are sufficient enough to cause mental agony to an aggrieved person," Judge RP Mogera noted in the order. Purnesh Modi, BJP MLA from Surat West,

submitted an allegation against Gandhi for criminal defamation over his "how come all thieves have Modi surname?" comment made during an election rally at Kolar in Karnataka on

April 13, 2019. READ | AMRITPAL SINGH'S WIFE KIRANDEEP KAUR STOPPED AT AMRITSAR AIRPORT WHILE TRYING TO BOARD FLIGHT TO UK WHAT WAS SAID BY RAHUL GANDHI'S SIDE? According to the

court, the appellant's attorney failed to show that rejecting the chance to fight the election by not getting his conviction overturned would result in "irreversible and

irrevocable damage." Additionally, it dismissed Gandhi's legal team's claim that a community as a whole cannot be defamed.  The court said that, based on the evidence and

observations made by the trial court, it seems that Gandhi made some disparaging comments about Prime Minister Narendra Modi in public and further compared those with the last name

"Modi" to thieves. Furthermore, the court noted that because the claimant was a former minister and was active in public life, such defamatory statements would have undoubtedly

damaged his image and caused him anguish and agony in society. The additional sessions court judge denied the appellant's claim that the trial was invalidated by a lack of geographical

jurisdiction at this point. RAHUL GANDHI TO MOVE TO GUJARAT HIGH COURT  According to Gandhi's attorney Kirit Panwala, the order from the Sessions Court would be contested in Gujarat

High Court. Gandhi claimed in his submission that his reputation will be irreparably harmed if the trial court's judgement from March 23 is not deferred and stayed. According to Gandhi,

the exorbitant penalty is against the law on the subject and unjustified in the current case because of his overt political implications. Gandhi had called his conviction "harsh,"

"erroneous," and "patently perverse," and said that the trial court had unfairly judged him after being greatly swayed by the fact that he was an MP. Congress leader

said that because the trial court was aware of his status as a witness, he was sentenced in a way that would warrant the order of disqualification. READ | COVID-19: WHAT IS ARCTURUS, NEW

OMICRON SUBVARIANT BEHIND RISE IN CASES? IS IT A CAUSE FOR CONCERN? SIGNS, SYMPTOMS HERE _(With inputs from PTI)_