oppn parties Why SC Rebuked Rahul in RSS Defamation Case

News Snippets

  • NCLT initiates bankruptcy proceedings against former Videocon chairman Venugopal Dhoot for defaulting on loans of Rs 6158cr as personal guarantor in two group companies
  • LIC approves 1:1 bonus share issue
  • Gold and silver futures also go down by 0.7% and 2.2% respectively
  • Stocks tumbled again on Monday as crude prices rose: Sensex went down by 703 points and Nifty by 207 points
  • Supreme Court refuses to cancel the land-for-jobs FIR against Lalu Prasad
  • The spectre of El Nino haunts India: IMD predicts 'below normal ' monsoon this year
  • Labour protest over increase in wages by 35% (as per Haryana example) turns violent in Noida, nearly 200 were detained by the police
  • Congress leader Sonia Gandhi said that the delimitation exercise must be carried out after the Census is complete
  • PM Modi says Parliament is on the verge of creating history as the Houses get ready to take up the women's reservation bills
  • Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran said that TCS COO Aarthi Subramanian is conducting a thorough inquiry to establish facts and identify individuals involved in the sexual harassment allegations at the company's Nashik office
  • Asha Bhonsle laid to rest with full state honours on Monday in Mumbai
  • AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal once again approached the Delhi HC to request the recusal of a judge from his case
  • Candidates Chess: R Vaishali on the verge of creating history, but needs two wins - one with black pieces - against formidable opponents to emerge as the challenger
  • Rohit Sharma, who retired hurt in the match versus RCB, underwent scans for possible hamstring injury
  • IPL: Abhishek Sharma fails for SRH but Ishan Kishan (91) shines. Then, Vaibhav Sooryavanshi fails for RR and SRH bolwers, especially unheralded Praful Hinge (4 for 24) and Sakib Hussain (4 for 24) win it for SRH. This was the first loss for table-toppers RR
Supreme Court questions Election Commission about SIR SOP and why logical discrepancy was introduced only in Bengal
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. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
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.