Can’t compel Rahul Gandhi to admit or deny transcript: Bombay HC – Times of India

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by RSS functionary Rajesh Kunte for orders to enable him to rely on a transcript in a defamation complaint that he filed against Rahul Gandhi.
Kunte had challenged a Bhiwandi magistrate’s order of 2018, that rejected his plea to admit in evidence a transcript of a 2014 speech by Gandhi, a copy of which the Congress leader had submitted before the HC in a quashing petition earlier.
Kunte had filed a complaint in annexing a compact disc (CD) of an alleged speech by Gandhi which he alleged was defamatory to RSS in connection with Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination.
Justice Revati Mohite Dere of the HC found no merit in Kunte’s petition and said the prosecution or complainant has to “stand on its own feet and prove its case on its own steam.”
She said, “Merely because the transcript is annexed to Gandhi’s petition doesn’t make it a “public document” for Kunte to rely on.
Gandhi’s quashing petition was dismissed by the HC, and he is facing trial in the 2014 case before the magistrate. Kunte, through his counsel Niteen Pradhan, had argued that by submitting a transcript of his speech from the CD annexed to the complaint against him, Gandhi was admitting the case against him.
He sought the transcript copy under section 294 of the Criminal Procedure Code which stipulates that a document filed before any court by prosecution or accused can be proved by asking them to admit or deny its genuineness.
The HC agreed with Gandhi’s counsel Sudeep Pasbola and advocate Kushal Mor and said that the an accused cannot be compelled to admit or deny any document against him.
“The right of an accused to remain silent flows from article 20(3) of the Constitution (immunity against self-incrimination) and is sacrosanct in a criminal trial. No court can compel or direct an accused to admit/deny any document. It is also not the intent of the legislature under Section 294 CrPC.”
The HC judgment says, “The question that arises is whether, in the facts, the respondent (Gandhi) can be compelled to admit… transcript of the alleged speech by taking recourse to the provisions of the Evidence Act. The answer is ‘No’.”