The Gauhati High Court has allowed a plea moved by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi against a sessions court’s order to permit examination of three additional witnesses in a 2016 defamation case against him [Rahul Gandhi v State of Assam and Another].Justice Arun Dev Choudhury found that the complainant had not specified anything or demonstrated in what manner the evidence of these witnesses had nexus with facts of his case.The grounds were too broad and general, it said, while ruling that the magistrate who had earlier rejected the plea for additional witnesses had taken the right decision.The High Court found that the Additional Sessions Judge had ignored the settled position of law while allowing the revisional plea against the magistrate’s decision.“The Revisional court, however, without advertening to the absence of any substantive ground or recording any finding of the necessity of such witness, has mechanically interfered with the reasoned order of the Magistrate,” it said..In 2016, one Anjan Kumar Bora had filed a defamation complaint before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati against Gandhi alleging that the Leader of Opposition in December 2015 had wrongly projected that he was prevented from going to Barpeta Satra, considered a sacred site by “RSS people”. Bora alleged that Gandhi had deliberately and intentionally made defamatory statements to communalise the issue to gain political mileage ahead of the elections in Assam.A magistrate had examined six witnesses in the case and taken cognizance under Section 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. After seven witnesses including the complainant had been examined, an application was filed to present three more witnesses. In 2023, the magistrate dismissed the application..However, the revisional court later allowed the introduction of three more witnesses. Gandhi then approached the High Court. His plea was allowed on October 13 with a direction to expedite the proceedings in the defamation case.“It is made clear that as the petitioner is a sitting Member of Parliament, the learned Magistrate shall take measures to expeditiously dispose of the case, in terms of the direction issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (supra),” the Court ordered..Senior Counsel AM Bora with Advocate VA Choudhury represented Gandhi.Public Prosecutor K Gogoi appeared for the State.Advocates BK Mahajan and N Mahajan represented the complainant. .[Read Judgment]
