Rahul Gandhi Can't Be Stopped From Deleting Video Of Speech Against Savarkar, It's His Personal Liberty: Pune Court

In the ongoing defamation case over Rahul Gandhi's remarks against right-wing ideologue Vinayak Savarkar, a special MP/MLA Court in Pune on Tuesday dismissed an application that sought a directive to the Pune Police to furnish a report, it initially awaited from YouTube USA with regards to the allegedly defamatory speech delivered by the Congress leader against Savarkar.

Notably, the complainant Satyaki Savarkar had last month filed an application urging the special MP/MLA court to direct the Pune Police to submit its report that it awaited from the YouTube USA. A further directive was sought to Gandhi against deletion of the speech he delivered in London, which he later uploaded on his YouTube Channel.

However, Special Judge Amol Shinde noted that Satyaki himself had in the initial stage of the case, contended that the reasons given by the police regarding information received from YouTube are irrelevant as he has filed news paper clippings which according to him, suffice for the purpose.

"The report is filed only for assisting the Magistrate in deciding whether process should be issued. After submission of the report the enquiry ends. Thereafter Magistrate has to either dismiss the complaint under section 203 of the CrPC or to issue process against the accused. In this case the Magistrate has issued process against the accused after considering the report. A fresh report cannot be called under sec.202 of CrPC after issuance of process," the special court said.

Now the matter is for evidence of the complainant, the judge noted, adding that at this stage, the Court cannot go back to pass any order under Sec.202 of CrPC.

"Now complainant has to lead his evidence and prove his case behind reasonable doubt. He cannot take the benefit of the Court order to collect the evidence against the accused. In private complaint police report cannot be called," the court held.

The judge emphasised that at this stage, Gandhi cannot be restrained from deleting the video.

"No personal liberty of the accused can be restrained. The complainant has filed the CD of the alleged defamatory video. That can be relied by the Court during trial. The complainant has filed on record the details about the alleged defamatory video. Therefore, this Court finds that there is no merits in the application of the complainant and same is liable to be dismissed," the judge held.

It would not be out of place to mention that Gandhi had opposed the said application through his lawyer Milind Pawar, who pointed out that the Pune Police, on orders of the special court had submitted a report on January 19, 2024, which comprised of the transcript of the speech, emails, a CD, statements of two witnesses and the case diary. This, Pawar had argued, is the final report as based on this very report, the special court took cognisance of the complaint by Satyaki and then issued summons against Gandhi.

Pawar had further pointed out that in January 2024 itself, Satyaki, while submitting the material like CD, speech copy, newspaper cutouts etc, had told the special court that the information to be received from YouTube would be irrelevant and the said submission was even taken on record by the court.

"It is wholly inconsistent and untenable for him to contend now that the technical report from the police authorities would serve as conclusive evidence against the accused. This contradiction clearly demonstrates that, with mala fide intentions and by employing pressure tactics, the complainant has sought to obtain orders from this Court," the reply stated.

Background:

The defamation complaint asserts that Gandhi has repeatedly defamed Savarkar on various occasions over the years. One specific incident highlighted was on March 5, 2023, when Gandhi addressed the Overseas Congress in the United Kingdom.

The complainant - Satyaki Savarkar has claimed that Gandhi made intentionally wild allegations against Savarkar, knowing them to be untrue, with the intention of harming Savarkar's reputation and causing mental agony to the complainant and his family. The complaint states that the defamatory speech was delivered in England, but its impact was felt in Pune as it was published and circulated throughout India.

Satyaki, in her complaint, has submitted several news reports and a YouTube link to a video of Gandhi's speech in London as evidence. She has claimed that Gandhi falsely accused Savarkar of writing a book in which he described beating up a Muslim person, which Savarkar never wrote and such an incident never happened.

Satyaki argued that Gandhi made these false, malicious, and wild allegations with the specific objective of defaming Savarkar and harming his reputation.

The criminal defamation application filed by Satyaki demands maximum punishment for Gandhi under Section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of the IPC and seeks imposition of maximum compensation as per Section 357 (Order to pay compensation) of the CrPC.

Click Here To Read/Download Order