New Delhi: Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi received a rap from the Supreme Court on Monday for his 2022 statement – Chinese “Thrashing our troops in Arunachal Pradesh” – while criticizing the government, the government, criticizing the government, malfunctions the government. “If you were a true Indian, you won’t say all,” the top court told him.A bench of Justices Dipankar Dutta and AG Maasih lashed out to accuse Rahul that China captured 2,000 square kilometers of Indian territory and asked him if he was present there. This made him clear to him that as the Leader of the Opposition, he cannot say that he would say whatever he wants.Senior advocate Abhishek Sinhali, who was present for Gandhi, defended him, saying, “If he cannot say these things which are published in the press, he cannot be a leader of protest”. However, he agreed that the statement could be given a better word.The SC’s sensor came during the hearing on Rahul’s argument, which was to remain in a defamation case on his claim about Indian Jawans, which was offered by Chinese during the Galwan deadlock. After the hearing, the court stayed the defamation proceedings against him, but not before giving him an early.Were you on the border?“Tell me, Dr. Singhvi, how will you know that 2,000 square kilometers were occupied by sugar in Indian territory? Did you have a reliable material? Why do you make these statements without anyone … If you were a true Indian, you wouldn’t say all this if there is a struggle on the border,” The bench said.The senior advocate replied, saying that it was also possible that a true Indian would say that 20 Indian soldiers were beaten and killed as it was a matter of concern for the country.Singhvi argued that while some people could not agree with the statement, it was not prohibited under Article 19 (1) (A) of the Constitution, which belongs to the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. He underlined that public interests were involved in the issue and would be unfortunate whether a leader of the opposition could raise and expose such an issue.“Whatever you have to say, why don’t you call it in Parliament? Why do you have to say this in social media posts?” The bench asked.Challenging the proceedings of the defamation case, Singhvi said that it was done to harass Rahul, and he also stated that the trial court did not follow Section 223 of BNSS, stating that the earlier hearing of the accused was mandatory before taking cognizance of a criminal complaint. The court then issued a notice on Rahul’s petition and despite senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, despite being present for the complainant, was on proceedings in the matter. The bench asked him to register a response.After the Allahabad High Court on 29 May, Rahul transferred SC to SC, which dismissed his petition to reduce the order passed by a court in Lucknow in February. HC noticed that the freedom of speech and expression did not involve the freedom to make statements that defame the Indian Army. The complaint was filed by East Border Roads Organization (BRO) Director Uday Shankar Srivastava during his Bharat Jodo Yatra in December 2022 to make alleged derogatory remarks against Rahul in December 2022.“People will ask about Bharat Joko Yatra, here and there, Ashok Gehlot and Sachin Pilot and what else. They will not ask a single question about China, about capturing 2,000 sqm Indian territory, death of 20 Indian soldiers and killed our soldiers in Arunchal region. He said at a press conference during the visit.
