"Just because you have 19(1)(a) [freedom of speech] you cannot say anything," the Bench said.
The Supreme Court on Monday reprimanded rebuked Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over his claim that more than 2,000 kilometres of Indian territory had been annexed by China, stating that a "true Indian" would not make such a remark. However, the court paused the defamation proceedings against Gandhi related to the statement.
"How did you know about 2,000 km being annexed by the Chinese?," the top court asked, while hearing Rahul Gandhi's plea challenging the defamation case on the matter.
It stressed, "If you're a true Indian, you wouldn't say it".
During his 2023 Bharat Jodo Yatra, the Congress leader claimed that a former Army officer had told him that China had occupied 2,000 square kilometres of Indian territory.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih further reprimanded Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, asking,
"You being leader of the Opposition, why would you say these things? Why will you not ask these questions in Parliament?".
The Court also asked whether his statements were based on any credible material.
"Why in social media post and not in parliament? How do you get to know when 2000 sq km was acquired by China? What is the credible material? A true Indian will not say this.
When there is a conflict across border, can you say all this. Why can't you ask the question in parliament? Just because you have 19(1)(a) [freedom of speech] you cannot say anything," the Bench said.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said the remarks by Gandhi cannot be a ground for a third party to file defamation case.
The Court was hearing an appeal by Gandhi against against an Allahabad High Court order which had upheld the summons issued by a Lucknow court to Gandhi in connection with the case.
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by lawyer Vivek Tiwari on behalf of Uday Shankar Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation with a rank equivalent to an Army Colonel.
Tiwari alleged that Gandhi’s remarks on December 16, 2022 regarding the December 9, 2022 clash between the Indian and Chinese armies were derogatory and defamatory towards the Indian military forces.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Alok Verma then directed Gandhi to appear for hearing on March 24 in the defamation case. Challenging this, Gandhi had moved the Allahabad High Court.
While dismissing Rahul Gandhi's plea against the Magistrate's order, the High Court observed that under Section 199(1) of the CrPC, an individual who is not the direct victim of an offence can still be regarded as an "aggrieved person" if the offence has caused them harm or adversely affected them.
The Court observed that the complainant in the case, a retired Director of the Border Roads Organisation, holding a rank equivalent to that of a Colonel, had filed the complaint over allegedly derogatory remarks made against the Indian Army.
Noting that the complainant had expressed deep respect for the Army and was personally hurt by the comments, the Court held that he qualified as an aggrieved person under Section 199 of the CrPC and was therefore entitled to file the complaint.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment