A special court for MPs and MLAs in Pune issued a significant directive on Friday, giving Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's legal team a deadline to formally respond to a fresh application in an ongoing defamation case. The application, filed by Satyaki Savarkar, the grandnephew of Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, seeks the court's intervention to obtain crucial digital evidence.
Core of the Legal Dispute: The Quest for Original Evidence
The court, presided over by Judicial Magistrate First Class Amol Shinde, ordered Gandhi's lawyer, Milind Pawar, to file a written response by December 11. The plea at the heart of this order requests the court to issue directions to a prominent US-based video-sharing platform and a major Indian newspaper. Satyaki Savarkar's legal team wants these entities to furnish the original video link and the related news report concerning Rahul Gandhi's speech delivered in London in March 2023.
The complainant's plea argues that the video was published on Gandhi's official channel on the platform on March 5, 2023. It emphasizes that summoning the original source is essential to prevent the accused from gaining an unfair advantage due to the potential loss of evidence, which it claims would prejudice the case and hinder justice.
Technical Hurdles and Adjournment in Court Proceedings
The defamation case is currently at the stage where the complainant, Satyaki Savarkar, is leading his evidence. Previously, he submitted a CD of the speech along with a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, which verifies electronic records. However, this CD could not be played in court due to unspecified technical reasons. A subsequent attempt to play another CD was rejected after Gandhi's lawyer objected, citing the absence of the mandatory 65B certificate.
In light of these difficulties, the court on Friday allowed an application from Satyaki's lawyer, Sangram Kolhatkar, seeking a limited adjournment. This pause is intended to allow the complainant to make proper technical arrangements to reconstruct or trace a functional CD of the speech so it can be correctly played and recorded as evidence.
Legal Arguments and Future Course
Rahul Gandhi's legal counsel, Milind Pawar, expressed strong objections to the adjournment, characterizing it as another delaying tactic by the complainant. Pawar confirmed to the media that they would comply with the court's order and submit their written response to the plea concerning the video platform and newspaper by the stipulated date of December 11.
The detailed plea from Savarkar's side asks the court to direct the US platform to provide specific metadata, including the upload date and time, URL, unique video ID, hash value, server logs, and any archived versions of the video to establish its authenticity and integrity beyond doubt.
This legal tussle stems from allegations that Rahul Gandhi made defamatory remarks against Veer Savarkar during his London address last year. The case continues to see procedural skirmishes as both sides prepare their evidentiary groundwork for a substantive hearing.
