‘Unfortunate that court procedures are used for political agendas’, Kapil Sibal on SC stay on Rahul Gandhi's conviction

The Supreme Court's put a stay on Rahul Gandhi's conviction in the case of his alleged remark on 'Modi' surname on Friday. The Congress declared the decision to be a victory of love over hate.

Also read: Rahul Gandhi meets Lalu Yadav after big relief from Supreme Court, Congress says, 'fortunate for his guidance'

Senior advocate and former Congress leader, Kapil Sibal, also hailed the decision and expressed his grief on the unhealthy practice of using court trials for political agendas. In his latest tweet, he claimed that since the conviction of Rahul Gandhi, he was sure that the decision is unwarranted and will not stand. To explain the reason behind his statement he quoted Supreme Court's statement on the case.

“Supreme Court Stays Rahul’s conviction. On the day Rahul was convicted I publicly said the conviction is unwarranted and will not stand. The reason I gave is what the Supreme Court said yesterday Unfortunate that court procedures are used for political agendas !” tweeted Kapil Sibal on Saturday.

Also read: Modi surname case: 5 things SC said while staying Rahul Gandhi's conviction

Rahul Gandhi defamation case over Modi surname remark

On Friday, Congress leader received a huge relief from the Supreme Court when the apex court stayed his conviction in a 2019 criminal defamation case.

The case was registered when Rahul Gandhi allegedly made remark over Modi surname. The case was filed by Purnesh Modi in 2019. The main objection was raised against Rahul Gandhi over his remark, “How come all thieves have Modi as the common surname?”

Also read: 'Rahul Gandhi is still a convict': Lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani on SC stay order

The conviction stay will enable Rahul Gandhi to contest Lok Sabha 2024 election. The suspension was followed after the trial court in Surat in Gujarat failed to explain why he deserved the maximum two-year punishment upon his conviction. The top court also underlined the fact that the sentence would not have attracted disqualification had it been a day lesser.

The court also observed that the utterances of Gandhi were not in good taste and a person in public life is expected to exercise caution while making public speeches. The apex court also mentioned that his conviction and disqualification not only hindered his right to continue in public life but also that of the electorate which elected him.

-With agency inputs