Sultanpur, April 17: The defamation case involving the Congress leader and Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi was heard in the MP-MLA court in Sultanpur district of Uttar Pradesh on Friday. During the hearing, the court took a strict stance on the plaintiff’s attitude and warned them against any future laxity.
Kashi Shukla said on Friday that the plaintiff has been repeatedly seeking adjournments for the past several dates, preventing the case from moving forward.
Taking this seriously, the court has clarified that if the plaintiff does not appear for arguments on the next scheduled date, coercive action may be taken against them. The next hearing has been scheduled for April 22.
Rahul’s lawyer, Kashi Shukla, stated that the court was to hear a petition under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Earlier, during the hearing on March 28th, plaintiff’s lawyer, Santosh Pandey, had requested a voice sample test from Rahul Gandhi. He filed an application under Section 311 read with Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
This application requested that a voice sample be taken from Rahul Gandhi and matched with a previously filed CD in a forensic laboratory. Rahul Gandhi’s lawyers objected to this demand. This defamation case was filed by BJP leader Vijay Mishra in October 2018. Rahul Gandhi surrendered in court on February 20, 2024. Subsequently, the special magistrate granted him bail on two sureties of 25,000 rupees each.
Rahul Gandhi appeared in the MP/MLA court on July 26, 2024, and recorded his statement. He declared himself innocent and called it a political conspiracy. Following Rahul Gandhi’s statement, the court directed the plaintiffs to present evidence, following which witnesses were continuously being presented.
Earlier, on February 20, Rahul Gandhi had recorded his statement in the MP/MLA court under Section 313 of the CrPC. The court had asked him to present his explanation and evidence regarding his innocence. However, Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer, Kashi Prasad Shukla, did not present any explanation or evidence in the court.