Can't compel Rahul Gandhi to produce book cited in his speech against Vinayak Savarkar: Pune court

A special MP/MLA court in Pune on Thursday rejected a plea by Satyaki Savarkar seeking a direction to compel Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to produce a book he cited during his alleged defamatory speech in 2023 against Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar [Satyaki Savarkar v Rahul Gandhi]..Satyaki Savarkar is the complainant in the defamation case filed by him against Gandhi.Judicial Magistrate First Class Amol Shinde, presiding over the matter, observed that Gandhi cannot be compelled to produce the booked he had referred to in the speech. “The accused cannot be compelled to produce the document/book sought by the complainant. As per Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, "No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself." Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that an order cannot be passed directing the accused to file the incriminating documents,” the Court said. .Satyaki Savarkar, the grand-nephew of Vinayak Savarkar, filed the defamation case in response to comments made by Rahul Gandhi during a speech in London in March 2023. Gandhi had reportedly referred to an incident allegedly described in Savarkar’s writings, where he and others assaulted a Muslim man, an act Gandhi claimed Savarkar had found “pleasurable.”Satyaki Savarkar disputed the existence of such an incident in any of Savarkar’s works and initiated defamation case, arguing that the statement was false and defamatory. In an application filed under Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), Savarkar sought an order directing Gandhi to produce the book he allegedly quoted. .Opposing the plea, Gandhi’s counsel contended that the trial had not yet commenced and that an accused person cannot be forced to disclose or submit material forming part of the defense. He argued that the burden of proof lies with the complainant and compelling the accused to produce documents would violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which guards against self-incrimination.Savarkar, on the other hand, argued that the book was central to proving the falsity of Gandhi’s claims and accused the defense of adopting delaying tactics.After hearing both sides, the court ruled in favor of Gandhi, finding that such a direction would violate fundamental rights. “The documents in question are incriminating in nature and are sought to be produced against the accused. The accused cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself, nor can he be compelled to produce incriminating material against him," the Court said.Hence, it rejected the application..Advocate Milind Pawar appeared for Gandhi.Advocate Sangram Kolhatkar appeared for Savarkar..[Read Order]