TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | Time CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Advertisement

Rahul Gandhi’s plea for exemption from court appearance to be heard on April 15

Thane, April 1 A court in Maharashtra’s Thane district on Saturday heard the arguments over Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s application for permanent exemption from appearance in a defamation case and adjourned the matter till April 15 when it is likely...
Advertisement

Thane, April 1

Advertisement

A court in Maharashtra’s Thane district on Saturday heard the arguments over Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s application for permanent exemption from appearance in a defamation case and adjourned the matter till April 15 when it is likely to pass orders.

Advertisement

Complainant and RSS activist Rajesh Kunte had, in 2014, filed a private complaint before the Bhiwandi magistrate’s court after watching Rahul’s speech where he allegedly accused the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination.

Rahul had appeared before the court in June 2018 and pleaded not guilty.

Last year, Rahul had filed an application seeking permanent exemption from appearing in the court, saying he was a member of Parliament who had to visit his constituency, attend party work and travel a lot.

Advertisement

Kunte has opposed Rahul’s application, saying the Congress leader had been disqualified as an MP after his conviction by a Surat court in a defamation case.

In the court of First Class Judicial Magistrate LC Wadikar on Saturday, Rahul’s lawyer Narayan Iyer contested the Congress leader’s disqualification saying that only the President had the power to do so. Also, Rahul is willing to challenge his conviction by the Surat court in the defamation case, he said.

The contentions raised by the complainant cannot “harm or disregard the accused seeking permanent exemption” in this case, he argued.

Advocate Prabhod Jaywant, who represented Kunte, urged the court to take note of their “pursis” (written note/information) and decide accordingly while passing the order.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement