A Pune court has rejected a researcher’s attempt to enter the ongoing private criminal defamation case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, ruling that he had no legal standing to participate in the trial and imposing a Rs 20,000 penalty for what it called an “unwarranted plea”.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Amol Shriram Shinde dismissed the intervention application filed by researcher Pankaj K Phadnis on August 14, saying he could not claim the status of an aggrieved person in the case.
The defamation complaint was filed by Satyaki Savarkar, grandnephew of freedom fighter Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, over alleged defamatory remarks made by Gandhi concerning the late freedom fighter.
COURT SAYS RESEARCHER HAS NO LOCUS STANDI
While rejecting Phadnis’ application, the court held that he had no legal standing, or locus standi, to participate in the private criminal complaint.
“The intervenor who is not a family member or near relative of Late Savarkar cannot unilaterally assume unto himself the status of an aggrieved person under Section 199 of Cr.P.C. to assert that his feelings were hurt and maintain the subject complaint,” the magistrate said.
The court also directed Phadnis to deposit the Rs 20,000 penalty with the District Legal Services Authority, Pune, on or before the next hearing.
The magistrate said the application was unwarranted and had consumed valuable judicial time.
BOTH SIDES OPPOSED PHADNIS’ PLEA
Phadnis had approached the court seeking to be impleaded as a necessary party in the case. He argued that his 25 years of research and historical documents could assist the court in establishing the truth.
The plea, however, faced strong opposition from both sides.
Satyaki Savarkar’s lawyer, Sangram Kothalkar, argued that criminal jurisprudence does not provide for an intervenor in a private complaint. He also accused Phadnis of attempting to delay the proceedings and promote his books.
Gandhi’s lawyer, Milind Pawar, opposed the intervention on the ground that bringing in a third party would fundamentally change the scope of the trial.
Pawar argued that allowing Phadnis to participate could prejudice the ongoing cross-examination and affect Gandhi’s right to a fair trial by making him face an “expanding target”.
TRIAL TO CONTINUE ON AUGUST 17
The court concurred with the arguments against the intervention and dismissed Phadnis’ application.
The main defamation proceedings will continue, with Satyaki Savarkar’s cross-examination scheduled for August 17.
– Ends
