oppn parties Why SC Rebuked Rahul in RSS Defamation Case

News Snippets

  • UP government removed Lokesh M as CEO of Noida Authority and formed a SIT to inquire into the death of techie Yuvraj Mehta who drowned after his car fell into a waterlogged trench at a commercial site
  • Nitin Nabin elected BJP President unopposed, will take over today
  • Supreme Court rules that abusive language against SC/ST persons cannot be construed an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
  • Orissa HC dismissed the pension cliams of 2nd wife citing monogamy in Hindu law
  • Delhi HC quashed the I-T notices to NDTV founders and directed the department to pay ₹ 2 lakh to them for 'harassment'
  • Bangladesh allows Chinese envoy to go near Chicken's Nest, ostensibly to see the Teesta project
  • Kishtwar encounter: Special forces jawan killed, 7 others injured in a faceoff with terrorists
  • PM Modi, in a special gesture, receives UAE President Md Bin Zayed Al Nahyan at the airport. India, UAE will boost strategic defence ties
  • EAM S Jaishankar tells Poland to stop backing Pak-backed terror in India. Also, Polish minister walks off a talk show when questioned on cross-border terrorism
  • Indigo likely to cut more flights after Feb 10 when the new flight rules kick in for it
  • Supreme Court asks EC to publish the names of all voters with 'logical discrepency' in th Bengal SIR
  • ICC has asked Bangladesh to decide by Jan 21 whether they will play in India or risk removal from the tournament. Meanwhile, as per reports, Pakistan is likely to withdraw if Bangladesh do not play
  • Tata Steel Masters Chess: Pragg loses again, Gukesh settles for a draw
  • WPL: RCB win their 5th consecutive game by beating Gujarat Giants by 61 runs, seal the playoff spot
  • Central Information Commission (CIC) bars lawyers from filing RTI applications for knowing details of cases they are fighting for their clients as it violates a Madras HC order that states that such RTIs defeat the law's core objectives
Stocks slump on Tuesday even as gold and silver toucvh new highs /////// Government advises kin of Indian officials in Bangladesh to return home
oppn parties
Why SC Rebuked Rahul in RSS Defamation Case

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2016-07-19 20:11:32

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.
The Supreme Court has rightly rebuked Rahul Gandhi for denigrating and blaming the RSS over Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. Rahul had said that the RSS was responsible for the Mahatma’s assassination in a speech in Maharashtra while campaigning for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Rajesh Kunte, an RSS activist, had filed a defamation case against the Gandhi scion. Gandhi had appealed to the SC to quash the case after the Bombay High Court had dismissed a similar petition.

The apex court was of the view that a prima facie case for collective denunciation could be made out against Gandhi. Hence, the court said that he had to either apologize for what he said or face trial and prove what he said was for public good.

The court reminded Gandhi that it had upheld criminal defamation law in a separate case recently. The court had then said that “it is always better to mind your language as right to free speech does not mean defaming another.” In the current instance, the court said that “the purpose of the law is to make people obey the law so that there is harmony rather than anarchy. The law is not against the right to freedom of speech.”

One hopes that this stricture on Rahul will discipline politicians and others. Public discourse in India is full of wild and uncorroborated charges, often bordering on vilification, being thrown by all and sundry at their respective known and even perceived opponents. If there were no law to prevent this, one shudders to think of the lows that will be reached. Already, celebrities, writers and people from the media are being trolled on social media in the most abusive language possible. Such personal attacks are a sign of a depraved society, especially as they come from behind a wall of relative anonymity.

The Supreme Court has done well to remind citizens that one person’s right to freedom of speech does not mean an unqualified license to defame another person or organization. A genuine difference of opinion is one thing and an unsubstantiated accusation quite another. In a civil society, there have to be some lines that should not be crossed. If politicians remember this and keep a lagaam on their jubaan, our already clogged judicial system will be less burdened with such cases.