PM Modi should have filed a defamation complaint… why did Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer say this in the court

face: Congress MP Rahul Gandhi’s counsel told a Surat court on Tuesday that a criminal defamation complaint should have been filed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the aggrieved party over his client’s alleged remark on ‘Modi surname’. The counsel for the former Congress president argued that most of the allegations made in Rahul’s speech during the campaign for the 2019 general elections were aimed at Prime Minister Modi and these allegations are at the heart of the cases.

In Gujarat, BJP MLA Purnesh Modi filed a defamation case against Rahul for his alleged remark that how Modi is the surname of all thieves. The Congress leader reportedly said this in Kolar, Karnataka ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Rahul’s counsel Kirit Panwala told the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate HH Verma in Surat that the ruling party (BJP) MLA was not an aggrieved party in the case and the remarks related to the ‘surname’ did not defame a social group as the ‘Modi community’ ‘ There is no such thing.

Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer said this
Panwala argued before the court that since 90 per cent of the allegations made in that election speech by Rahul Gandhi were aimed at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, he as the aggrieved person should have filed the defamation complaint and not Purnesh Modi . He argued that the line used by Rahul Gandhi does not defame a community, as there is no such community.

This action is flawed: Lawyer
Panwala told the court that the proceedings in the case were flawed as the procedure laid down in Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for such matters was not followed. He argued that Rahul Gandhi lives in Delhi, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the (Surat) court. Such an accused is required under law to examine the witnesses and investigate the matter. Thereafter, the court is required to show cause as to whether summons should be issued or not. No such procedure was followed.