Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Saturday, May 4, 2024

Rahul Gandhi Disqualified As MP After Bizarre Sentence : Kapil Sibal

Posted in: Political
Mon, Mar 27, 23, 21:03, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
4 out of 5 with 1 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 8396
Kapil Sibal himself says on record about Rahul Gandhi’s conviction that both the process and the outcome of the 2019 case are bizarre.

It definitely cannot be taken lightly by anyone when none other than one of the most sharpest and eminent legal luminary that India has ever produced and so also President of Supreme Court Bar Association on three occasions and that too way back in 1995-96, 1997-1998 and 2001-2002 and having held many other prestigious posts like that of Additional Solicitor General of India with more than fifty years of most distinguished experience and that too in none other than the Supreme Court itself that is Kapil Sibal himself says on record about Rahul Gandhi’s conviction that both the process and the outcome of the 2019 case are bizarre. Sibal minced just no words to say that:
Legal processes are used far too often for political ends. I have no doubt that there will be a stay on conviction. This is absurd, the order is bizarre. It does not make sense to me. The individuals don’t go to court, some person who is a BJP member, whose name ends with Modi goes to court.

In addition, this BJP member who went to court is a former Minister also in the Gujarat State Government of BJP. Of course, what Kapil Sibal has pointed out is really far too serious and it merits prompt corrective measures to restore the faith of the people in the judiciary which is so very vital for the successful functioning of a democratic country like ours. Kapil Sibal is pretty confident that there will be a stay on conviction.

It must be noted that eminent and senior lawyer and so also President of Supreme Court Bar Association – Vikas Singh while reacting on Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in Surat said that before Election Commission declares by-elections to be held in his constituency of Wayanad in Kerala, Rahul would have to go to the higher court to restore his Lok Sabha membership and will have to get his conviction sentence suspended and also stay on his conviction. Vikas Singh further added that:
If his conviction is stayed then his membership can be restored. For this he will have to promptly turn to the appellate court.

Another eminent lawyer and Constitutional expert Rakesh Dwivedi also termed the disqualification of Rahul as MP illegal because he has not been given the time of 30 days. Yet another one of the most eminent legal luminary and former Additional Solicitor General of India and senior Supreme Court lawyer rated among the top lawyers of India – Abhishek Manu Singhvi who was designated senior at a very young age too minced just no words to say that:
We believe the judgment is full of errors. Judgment will be challenged and we hope it will ultimately be quashed. Singhvi also termed it as the worst kind of political vendetta against Rahul Gandhi by ruling government.

Not stopping here, Singhvi also pointed out that the complainant of the case took stay on his own complaint from the High Court. Singhvi also raised very serious questions over the change of Judge in the matter which cannot be just brushed aside and put the sequence of the case before the media. He also further added that:
We are confident that we will get a stay of the conviction which will remove the very basis of this disqualification. We have full faith in the law. We believe we will emerge victorious in the near future.

Adding more to it, Singhvi further pointed out in simple, suave and straightforward words that:
The decision given by the Magistrate of Surat regarding the statement of Kolar is a violation of Section 202. The government is deliberately trying to suppress voices every day by imposing false cases, but Congress or Rahul Gandhi will not hesitate to raise issues of public interest. Still more, Singhvi further said quite confidently that:
This is the first decision and the lowest decision in the judicial hierarchy, we will take it to the higher court. This is a wrong decision and cannot be supported in law. We are sure that a positive decision will come on the subject.

Even my senior and distinguished colleague in Meerut Bar – Parvez Alam with more than two decades of experience and who is also a High Court lawyer and so also a Supreme Court lawyer too pointed out unequivocally that Rahul Gandhi was raising his voice most strongly against those corrupt persons like Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi and others who after conveniently amassing crores and crores of illegal money from India had fled away so easily with that ill gotten wealth to other countries abroad and he had not targeted any particular caste or surname nor was it his intention to do so. Parvez further said that Rahul Gandhi is a kind hearted person with a very strong conviction who never hides what he has in his heart and he speaks without fearing any person and he has been unnecessarily maligned too much. I must definitely concede that what my senior colleague – Parvez pointed out after deliberating has certainly a lot of merit in it! Parvez too further also expressed full confidence that Rahul Gandhi would win the case in the higher court and he also pointed out that we saw how hard he worked in his Bharat Jodo yatra concluded just some time back and had unflinching faith that he will be able to revive Congress in the coming years!

Nationalist Congress Party supremo Sharad Pawar minced no words to condemn the verdict and said that it was an attempt to suppress the voice of opposition leaders. He said in no uncertain terms that:
I express my serious concerns at the attempts to curtail fundamental rights, freedom of speech and democratic expression in the country. The repeated attempts to suppress the voice of political parties, leaders and citizens of India is a matter of grave concern. Today’s judgment of Rahul Gandhi underscores the point.

Even eminent film actress Swara Bhaskar has expressed her utmost displeasure over Rahul Gandhi’s disqualification from Lok Sabha calling it ‘blatant misuse of law’ and ‘strong arm tactics’. She also shared the news about Rahul Gandhi losing the Lok Sabha seat and wrote, ‘That’s how scared they are of so-called ‘Pappu’! Blatant misuse of law to ensure that Rahul Gandhi’s growing popularity, credibility & stature are curbed and clear strong-arm tactics for 2024 Lok Sabha that RG now cannot contest.. My guess is RG will come out of this taller.

Actor-politician Kamal Hassan tweeted supporting Rahul Gandhi and said the Congress leader has seen more testing times and unfair moments and just like before he will not just sail through but emerge more stronger. In his tweet, Kamal Hassan hastened to add stating that:
Our judicial system is robust enough to correct aberrations in dispensation of justice. We are sure, you will get your justice on your appeal of the Surat Court’s decision! Satyameva Jayate! No doubt, a very balanced stand taken by Kamal Hassan indeed! He has reaffirmed his full faith in the Indian judiciary and that truth shall prevail finally!

On a personal note, I too will also definitely not raise any question marks on the ruling by the court of Surat which convicted Rahul Gandhi. Being a lawyer myself I have to definitely respect what a court rules and abide unflinchingly by what the court rules as my former teacher who once in a few months used to come and give lectures on various key topics of law in Symbiosis Law College in Pune and one of the most experienced lawyer of India with more than seven and a half decades of most distinguished experience in the Supreme Court itself – late Shri Ram Jethmalani always advocated and who himself even in his last days was very critical that why Centre is not taking steps to bring back all the black money from abroad stored in various banks like Swiss banks! I am however pretty sure that truth shall definitely prevail finally. Rahul Gandhi comes from a very good family with excellent track record whose father and former PM of India from 1984 to 1989 and so also the leader of Opposition till he died late Shri Rajiv Gandhi was killed by the suicide bomber in 1991 and so also his grand mother and former PM late Mrs Indira Gandhi who was most instrumental in partitioning Pakistan into Pakistan and Bangladesh and who dealt with militancy in Punjab with iron hands for which she was killed by her own Sikh body guards whom she treated like her own family member and never doubted them! Even the great grand father of Rahul Gandhi – Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stayed in prison for so many years while fighting relentlessly against the British rule!

It definitely cannot be glossed over that all doors are still not closed for Rahul Gandhi and he can definitely stage an amazing comeback if his legal team play their cards well in the appellate court by arguing most flawlessly in Rahul’s favour and pointing out how his anger against few corrupt Modis like Nirav Modi who after looting huge money had fled abroad so easily was misinterpreted to defaming the whole particular surname of Modi which never was his intention. Rahul Gandhi has himself also just recently clarified that he never sought foreign intervention in India’s matters and he had been misquoted and he never abused any particular surname and had only lashed out against particular corrupt individuals. A mountain should not be made out of a molehill and Rahul Gandhi behind whom so many Opposition leaders have rallied behind I am sure will contribute immensely once his membership is restored after he wins his case successfully from the higher courts or the highest court! But till then we have to do nothing but just wait and watch and keep our fingers totally crossed! Rahul Gandhi too only spoke on Gautam Adani in his recent press conference and that’s all!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Najma vs Govt of NCT of Delhi a promise or assurance given by the Chief Minister in a press conference amounts to an enforceable promise and that a CM is expected to exercise his authority to give effect to such a promise.
It goes without saying that the population of India is increasing very rapidly which is a cause of grave concern
Madhav Sathe v Maharashtra a plea filed by two politician-applicants seeking quashing of a conviction order on the ground that they had settled the dispute with the victim-complainant.
Talibanis are entering in one go from Pakistan to Afghanistan to occupy it and massacre whoever comes in their way with full help, active support both moral and material with latest weapons
The purpose of this proposed law is to tackle the growing population in the State and so ensuring judicious and equal availability of all the resources in the State through a two-child policy.
Susmita Saha Dutta v/s UOI has outrightly rejected State Government's argument that police can't be held responsible for post-poll violence due to Election Commission of India's (ECI's) Model Code of Conduct.
Dumya Alias Lakhan Alias Inamdar, Etc vs Maharashtra the default sentences imposed on a convict cannot be directed to run concurrently.
Hindus are the most tolerant of all the religions in the world. I am a Muslim but I will never shy away from saying that Muslims must learn tolerance from Hindus
Nine of our soldiers died in J&K and India will be playing T20 match with Pakistan on October 24? Do the lives of our soldiers carry no value?
o one can dare do what Congress can dare do in India. The biggest, bluntest and the boldest truth to prove my inevitable point lies in the irrefutable fact that it was the Congress party under the dynamic
West Bengal vs Suvendu Adhikari refused to interfere with an order of a Single Bench wherein criminal proceedings initiated against BJP MLA Suvendu Adhikari who secured maximum limelight after he defeated Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in Nandigram by a convincing margin had been stayed.
Hasratullah Shervani v/s UP From perusal of the injury report, it prima facie supports the contents of first information report, therefore, in above circumstances and that the injured has turned hostile is of no consequence.
Lawyers Voice vs Punjabthere is a blame game between the State and Central Government as to who is responsible for such lapses.
High Court Bench must be created in West UP at Meerut even though his most commendable recommendation was not implemented in UPA's regime
Ashish Shelar v/s Maharashtra Legislative Assembly that the suspension of 12 BJP MLAs from the Maharashtra Assembly for a full year is prima facie unconstitutional and worse than expulsion as the constituency is remaining unrepresented.
dogged the limelight for quite some time over the wearing of hijab in educational institutions in Karnataka was most unfortunate.
hat had happened so brazenly with Muskan Khan even though she is a Muslim and I am a Hindu as there was no justification to haul her up in the manner
Dr Rajeev Gupta M.D. v. U.P. that it is like a termite in every system and once it enters the system, it keeps on getting bigger and bigger.
March a woman was shown offering namaz in a class in Sagar University
Shahida vs UP that tolerance, respect for all communities is essential to keep country united.
Madrasa-e-Anware Rabbani Waqf Committee v/s Surat Municipal Corporation on the ground that the construction was without prior permission of the competent authority.
Brinda Karat v. State of NCT of Delhi that: Hate speeches especially delivered by elected representatives, political and religious leaders based on religion, caste, region or ethnicity militate against the concept of fraternity, bulldoze the constitutional ethos, and violates Articles 14, 15, 19, 21 read with Article 38 of the Constitution
she was squarely blamed single handedly for the terror acts that were perpetrated in Udaipur, Kanpur and other parts of the country.
had lashed out most severely at Nupur Sharma for being single handedly responsible for putting the entire nation on fire which drew scathing criticism
Kamini Arya Through Perokar vs NCT Of Delhi has taken suo motu cognizance to facilitate admission of an 8 year old child to school which could not be facilitated for the reason that her parents were in judicial custody in a murder case since July 2021.
Parvez Parwaz vs Uttar Pradesh dismissed a plea challenging denial of sanction to prosecute Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in a case alleging making of hate speech in 2007
Vishwanath Pratap Singh vs Election Commission of Indiathat the right to contest an election is not a fundamental right but only a right conferred by a statute.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyender Jain, dismissed the plea made by Delhi Health Minister challenging the trial court order transferring his money laundering case to another Judge.
Umar Khalid that the attack on police personnel during the 2020 North East Delhi riots by women protestors prima facie be covered by the definition of ‘terrorist act’ under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
United we stand and divided we fall! They also gloss over what Deanswift had once very famously
why Lord Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru is not the official father of the nation?
Ramaprasad Sarkar v. Union of India dismissed a PIL praying for a direction to the Central government to remove Jagdeep Dhankhar as the Governor of West Bengal, claiming that he was acting as the ‘mouthpiece of the Bharatiya Janata Party’.
Mamata Banerjee is an Indian politician and the current Chief Minister of West Bengal. She was born on January 5, 1955, in Kolkata, West Bengal. Mamata Banerjee completed her education from Jogamaya Devi College and the University of Calcutta.
Shri Potsangbam Jaminikanta Singh v/s Manipur directed the State government to decongest the traffic on national highway in front of the Old Manipur Secretariat by making arrangements for proper parking of vehicles on both sides.
Shamim vs UP that it is a clear case of false implication due to political rivalry and property dispute. The Court also held that there is no material evidence to substantiate the prosecution case.
In my life, I definitely cannot ever even dare dream of a more bigger insult of legendary Prabhu Shri Ram
Top