The top court has stayed the sentence of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in the ‘Modi defamation case’.
Rejecting the decisions of the lower court and the High Court, the apex court has asked what are the reasons and grounds for awarding the maximum sentence of 2 years in the context of defamation?
Had he been sentenced to even a day less, Rahul Gandhi’s MP would not have been cancelled.
It is not just a question of membership of an MP, but a matter of taking away the representation of an area.
There is a question of disrespecting the voting rights of the lakhs of people of the parliamentary constituency who had voted and elected him as an MP, hence there is a constitutional concern as well.
The Supreme Court, as a public representative, has also advised Rahul Gandhi to make statements from the public forum after thinking carefully, because the effect of the statements of MPs is widespread.
Due to this, the public system can be unbalanced and any person, caste, community, the organization is also insulted.
One’s fundamental and constitutional rights are also violated. However, Congress leaders have termed the Supreme Court’s decision as the victory of truth, justice, constitution and democracy.
From Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, former President Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra to party spokespersons have made similar comments. Now the entire Congress including Rahul should be convinced that the constitution, democracy and judiciary are still alive and effective in the country.
However, Rahul Gandhi appeared somewhat extra moderate, while some spokespersons even reached the level of ‘dictators’.
Of course, these are moments of glee and celebration for the Congress. Rahul’s parliament membership was not only terminated, but he would have been ‘disqualified’ for election for 8 years. Now he will try to run the opposition alliance forward with new enthusiasm and will keep his leadership claim alive by contesting the 2024 elections.
It is ‘immature politics’ to consider him as the captain of ‘India’ and ‘natural choice’ for the post of Prime Minister from now on.
Let us remind you that on April 13, 2019, Rahul Gandhi raised the question in an election rally in Karnataka – ‘Why are all thieves with Modi surname?’ Actually his target was Prime Minister Modi, Against whom the Congress had launched a propaganda campaign – ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’.
However, that case of criminal defamation is still in court. The apex court has only stayed the sentence. Thirteen other criminal cases against Rahul Gandhi are also pending before the court. He is out on bail in an alleged scam. The Supreme Court has stayed the maximum punishment in view of constitutional concerns.
It is obvious that now his MP post restored. In that context, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhary, leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party in the Lok Sabha, has submitted the copy of the court order and the letter requesting for the reinstatement of the MP to the Lok Sabha Secretariat.
Congress is very keen that Tuesday-Wednesday, August 8-9, In the discussion on the no-confidence motion, Rahul Gandhi can definitely speak to ‘expose’ the Modi government. It is up to the discretion of the Speaker.
After Rahul becomes active as an MP, the attitude and equation of politics will also change. It is also ‘over-zealous’ to consider the 2024 fight as Prime Minister Modi vs Rahul, as Rahul Gandhi was the Congress President in 2019, when only 52 MPs of the party could win in the general elections.
However, Rahul Gandhi should be in the Lok Sabha. Now he can once again contest from the old parliamentary constituency of Amethi. This is the belief of Congress spokespersons ‘off the record’.
If this reference has come to the fore, then the fact should also be discussed that about 70 percent of the MPs have criminal cases in the House. If maximum punishment is given to all, then the parliament itself will be empty.
Therefore, the law of 2 years sentence and cancellation of MP should be reconsidered. Now Rahul Gandhi should play his role as a positive opposition in the Parliament and ask the government on issues of public interest.