How SC reprieve to Rahul in China remark case got dwarfed by judge’s ‘political’ rebuke

In a pyrrhic moment for Rahul Gandhi, the Supreme Court, on Monday (August 4), stayed proceedings in a criminal defamation case filed against him but also made oral remarks that have granted ammunition to the ruling BJP to, yet again, accuse the Lok Sabha’s Leader of Opposition of propagating “anti-India” sentiments that “demoralise our Armed Forces”.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih was hearing Rahul’s plea challenging the Allahabad High Court’s decision of declining to stay criminal defamation proceedings initiated in a Lucknow trial court for his “Chinese soldiers are beating up Indian Army personnel” comment. The statement made by Rahul during his Bharat Jodo Yatra in December 2022 had triggered Uday Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation (BRO), to file a case in Lucknow alleging that the Congress leader had defamed the Indian Army.

Also read: BJP labels Rahul Gandhi 'China Guru' after SC chides him

SC's rap on knuckles

Though the apex court granted interim relief to the Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition (LoP) by directing a three-week stay on the proceedings in the trial court, what has evidently made headlines is the reprimand Justice Datta dished out to Rahul in his oral remarks when senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi was arguing for a stay.

“How do you get to know that 2,000 square kilometres of Indian territory have been occupied by the Chinese? Were you there? Do you have any credible material?... If you are a true Indian, you would not say all this,” Justice Datta said.

When Singhvi, representing Rahul, countered, saying it was “possible that a true Indian will say that our 20 Indian soldiers were beaten up and killed and that is a matter of concern,” Justice Datta shot back asking, “When there is a conflict across the border, is it unusual to have casualties on both sides?”

Also read: SC chides Rahul over Galwan remarks: ‘If you were a true Indian, you wouldn’t say this’

Remarks from BJP’s handbook?

What almost seemed like turning the interpretation of a citizen’s fundamental right to free speech, enshrined under the Constitution’s Article 19 (10 (a), on its head, Justice Datta also wondered why Rahul made statements on social media instead of raising them in Parliament. “Whatever you have to say, why don’t you say in Parliament? Why do you have to say this in social media posts,” Justice Datta asked when Singhvi asked why the Congress leader couldn’t say things “published in the press”.

The court’s unusual choice of chiding Rahul with its “if you are a true Indian” remarks – a question straight out of the ruling party’s arsenal of jibes often directed at the Congress leader and his party for raising issues – was expectedly lapped up by the BJP.

The political war of words that Justice Datta’s remarks against Rahul triggered relegated the fact about the Congress leader actually getting a reprieve from the court to a footnote.

BJP laps up the opportunity

Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju was quick to slam Rahul, practically asserting that only the official version from the government of what went down in Ladakh’s Galwan Valley during the Indian Army’s clashes with Chinese PLA personnel must be treated as the truth.

Also read: In poll-bound Bihar, Rahul to intensify protests against EC with padyatras

“There are only three possibilities. One is the government of India or the Army itself, if they provide evidence, that should be treated as an official document... The government has already given information about how well our territory is being secured. The second possibility is that Rahul Gandhi might have got the information from the Chinese government or the Chinese authority. Or third is a self-fabricated, self-created, self-cooked story. So, Rahul Gandhi has to tell whether his claim of Chinese occupation of Indian territory is from a government of India source, a Chinese source or is his own creation (sic),” Rijiju told reporters in Parliament.

Questions on Rahul’s LoP position

Since the May 2020 Galwan clashes, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government have maintained that India had not lost any territory in Ladakh to the Chinese during or in the aftermath of the prolonged skirmishes. In contrast, credible security experts and even members of the Indian security establishment have repeatedly highlighted that the Indian Army was no longer able to patrol some parts of Ladakh’s Galwan and Depsang, adjoining the famous Pangong Tso lake, as before, while local Ladakhis too were unable to access certain grazing lands in the region due to Chinese occupation.

Also read: Shashi Tharoor backs India-US negotiators after Rahul's 'dead economy' remark

With the apex court, however, slamming Rahul for his remarks, the BJP has got another arrow in its quiver to pierce the Congress with, especially considering that accusing the Lok Sabha LoP and his party of being “anti-India” and questioning the Nehru-Gandhi family’s patriotism has been a preferred slur of the saffron ecosystem each time Rahul questions the Modi regime on issues of foreign policy or national security.

At Monday’s official BJP press conference, party spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia weaponised the court’s observations to question if “Bharat deserves a better Leader of Opposition.” “As a Leader of Opposition who has taken oath under the Constitution, to protect the sovereignty of our country, is he destroying the sovereignty of our country? Is he helping nations that are inimical to our country? Is he demoralising the brave Indian armed forces?” Bhatia asked.

Unnecessary political comment by court: Cong

The Congress, understandably, has been left red-faced by the court’s remarks and the predictable BJP onslaught that followed.

In a post on X, senior advocate Singhvi said it was “ironical and amazing” that “losers” were crowing against Rahul even though the court had formed a prima facie opinion in favour of the Congress leader and granted a stay on the defamation proceedings.

Also read: Rahul Gandhi alleges Lok Sabha election was rigged, stolen

Noting that social media posts by “BJP trolls” and the BJP’s IT Cell chief, Amit Malviya, sound as if Rahul had lost the case, Singhvi pointed out that the Congress leader had, in fact, been granted reprieve despite resistance from the opposing counsel and that the court’s oral observations were “always made to elicit responses from each side”. “Politics wins; reason, rationality, law, and judicial order in black and white loses,” the senior advocate noted.

While agreeing with Singhvi, Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi, however, lamented that the court had made “an unnecessary political comment” and that its observation that the LoP should speak on issues in Parliament and not on social media was “dangerous for a healthy democracy” as it “redefines freedom of speech as well as the role of the Opposition.”

Also read: Right after cornering Modi in LS, Rahul’s ‘self-sabotage’ leaves Cong red-faced

“Our leader, Rahul Gandhi, raised the issue of Galwan not once but many times in Lok Sabha, and he has raised it outside Lok Sabha too. Not only Rahul, people from the security establishment, locals from Ladakh, including those from the BJP, have time and again said that the Chinese have encroached on our territory in Ladakh, while the Modi government has chosen to stay quiet. To tell the Leader of Opposition that you cannot speak anywhere except in Parliament is not right, and I hope that the Hon’ble Supreme Court will not use such language which goes against the Constitution and its own judgments on free speech,” Pratapgarhi told The Federal.