Today’s Judgment of Supreme Court of India on Section 389 of the CrPC titled Omprakash Sahni Vs Jai Shankar Chaudhary & Anr will further add a legal impediment in getting relief of suspension of sentence from the Gujarat High Court and thereafter Supreme Court of India for Rahul Gandhi.

Chandigarh (ABC Live): The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday refused to grant interim relief to Indian National Congress Leader Rahul Gandhi in Modi Surname defamation case for suspension of his conviction made by Surat Court.

It is in public records that on April, 20, 2023 the Surat Sessions Court dismissed Mr. Gandhi plea for staying his conviction, wherein he was sentenced to two years imprisonment, leading to his disqualification from the Lok Sabha.

Today, Justice Hemant Prachchhak after lengthy arguments made by both parties reserved his judgment for pronouncement of order after summer vaccination and did not grant any interim relief to Gandhi till then.

The Supreme Court of India today in Case titled Omprakash Sahni  Vs Jai Shankar Chaudhary & Anr passed a judgment on Section 389 of CrPC, a legal provision dealing with suspension of sentence during the pendency of appeal, wherein the apex Court opined that, “the endeavour on the part of the Court, therefore, should be to see as to whether the case presented by the prosecution and accepted by the Trial Court can be said to be a case in which, ultimately the convict stands for fair chances of acquittal. If the answer to the above said question is to be in the affirmative, as a necessary corollary, we shall have to say that, if ultimately the convict appears to be entitled to have an acquittal at the hands of this Court, he should not be kept behind the bars for a pretty long time till the conclusion of the appeal, which usually take very long for decision and disposal. However, while undertaking the exercise to ascertain whether the convict has fair chances of acquittal, what is to be looked into is something palpable. To put it in other words, something which is very apparent or gross on the face of the record, on the basis of which, the Court can arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that the conviction may not be sustainable. The Appellate Court should not reappreciate the evidence at the stage of Section 389 of the CrPC and try to pick up few lacunas or loopholes here or there in the case of the prosecution. Such would not be a correct approach.”

Keeping view the lower court records which ABC Legal research team has accessed and public stand taken by Rahul Gandhi suggests that on conviction for defamation there is nothing on records where defence (Rahul Gandhi legal team) proved in trial that neither he said, “Why All thieves Have Modi Surnames” and nor Mr Gandhi if said has apologized for the same, which means that lower court records somehow substantiates element of defamation and only debate left on duration of sentence of two years, which is maximum and there are good chances that It may come down to six months to one year in appeal but it will take time ,whereas  Rahul Gandhi legal team is working for instant relief of keeping sentence of Two years in abeyance during the pendency of appeal in Session Court.

Today’s Judgment of Supreme Court of India on Section 389 of the CrPC titled Omprakash Sahni  Vs Jai Shankar Chaudhary & Anr will further add a legal impediment in getting relief of suspension of sentence  from the Gujarat High Court and thereafter Supreme Court of India for Rahul Gandhi.

Explained: Why India Urgently NeedsSeparate Investigating Police?