Defamation case: HC junks RSS man's plea seeking Gandhi’s speech transcript

The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed RSS functionary Rajesh Kuntes plea seeking that the transcript of Rahul Gandhis speech made in 2014 in which he allegedly blamed the RSS for Mahatma Gandhis assassination be admitted as evidence in a criminal defamation case filed against the Congress leader observing that an accused cannot be compelled to admit or deny any documentKunte had approached the HC in 2019 challenging an order of the Bhiwandi magistrates court passed in September 2018 which dismissed his request to admit the transcript copy in the list of documents under section 294 of the CrPcOn Monday a single bench of the Bombay HC presided over by Justice Revati Mohite Dere dismissed Kuntes pleaRahul Gandhi is facing trial in a criminal defamation case following an FIR filed against him by Kunte in 2014 after the said speechAs per Kuntes plea on March 6 2014 Rahul Gandhi made a speech in Bhiwandi during an election rally where he allegedly said that RSS people had killed Mahatma GandhiSoon after Kunte who is the secretary of the Bhiwandi unit of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh lodged a complaint against Rahul GandhiThe Congress leader later said his comments had been quoted out of contextAlso read BJPRSS fake Hindus indulge in brokerage of religion Rahul GandhiIn December 2014 Rahul Gandhi moved to the Bombay High Court challenging the defamation proceedings initiated against him He had at that time submitted a transcript of the said speech in the HCIn his plea in the HC Rahul Gandhi said among other things that the BJP and RSS were essentially the same and while he had meant to speak about the BJPs position on Mahatma Gandhis assassination he had said RSS insteadHe had further said that the imputation made against the RSS was true and therefore constituted a ground for his defence to the defamation proceedingsHis plea was dismissed by the HC in 2015Kunte said in his plea before the HC that Rahul Gandhi had nowhere denied having made the speech and merely explained the circumstances surrounding his speech as his defenceHe further said by filing the petition in the HC and listing the abovementioned grounds Rahul Gandhi had in a way verified the transcript of such speech The transcript therefore had been proved Kunte saidReading of the writ petition Gandhis shows that it squarely relies on the transcript of the speech and in fact substantiates the same transcript to be genuine Kuntes plea in the HC readKunte had procured certified copies of Rahul Gandhis writ petition filed in the HC and the transcript copy he had submitted as an annexure to the petition Kunte then approached the magistrates court with the certified copies and urged it to admit the transcript copies in the list of documents under section 294 of CrPcAs per procedure when a document is produced before a court by the prosecution it is first put in a list of documents and then the other side is called upon to either admit or deny the genuineness of that documentOnce genuineness is admitted by the defence that document can be read as substantive evidence under 294 of the CrPCIn the HC Rahul Gandhis lawyer Kushal Mor had opposed Kuntes plea saying that in a trial the prosecution must stand on its legs and that an accused couldnt be forced to admit the genuineness of the documentThe high court agreed with the submissions and said on Monday that the genuineness of the transcript will have to be proven by Kunte or his lawyers before the magistrates court at the time of trialThe submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Annexure C transcript copy to the writ petition filed by the respondent No 1 Rahul Gandhi in this Court ought to have been exhibited under Section 294 CrPC as it was relied upon by respondent No1 is wholly misconceived the HC saidIt is a settled law that the prosecution must stand on its own feet in order to prove its case it saidThe high court further said that Rahul Gandhi had annexed the transcript copy to his plea to show in the HC that no case of defamation was made against himMerely because the said transcript had been annexed by Rahul Gandhi Kunte couldnt claim to have been absolved of his liability to proving the genuineness of the transcript and its admissibility as evidence during the trial the bench saidThe said CD of the transcript is a document of the petitioner which will have to be proved by the petitioner during the course of the trial in accordance with the law Merely because the petitioner Kunte has obtained a certified copy of the petition along with the annexures do not mean that he can compel respondent No1 Rahul Gandhi to admitdeny Annexure C to the said petition it said while dismissing Kuntes pleaNo Court can compel or direct an accused to admitdeny any document It is also not the intent of the legislature under Section 294 CrPC the high court saidThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever