A Pune Magistrate dismissed Satyaki Savarkar’s plea seeking to stop Rahul Gandhi from deleting an alleged defamatory video. The court said, “The complainant has filed the CD of the alleged defamatory video. That can be relied upon by the Court during trial.”
Pune: A Magistrate court in Pune has rejected an application filed by Satyaki Savarkar, who is the grand nephew of Hindu ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. He had asked the court to direct the police to file an updated report and also to stop Congress leader Rahul Gandhi from deleting a video which is alleged to be defamatory.
With this order, the court has given relief to Rahul Gandhi in the ongoing criminal defamation case.
The order was passed by Judicial Magistrate Amol Shinde. While dismissing the plea, he said that Gandhi cannot be stopped from removing the video at this stage of the case.
The Magistrate made it clear that the rights of the accused cannot be limited during this phase of the proceedings.
He specifically observed,
“The complainant has filed the CD of the alleged defamatory video. That can be relied upon by the Court during trial.”
The application was filed by Satyaki Savarkar through his lawyer Sangram Kolhatkar. It asked for a status report from Vishrambag Police Station on their probe about the YouTube video and also demanded that the court order Gandhi not to delete the content.
Earlier, in May 2024, the Vishrambag Police had filed a report under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). In that report, the police said that they had asked YouTube for details like the IP address, channel profile, and email ID connected to Gandhi’s account.
But since then, no fresh report was filed in court. Savarkar’s lawyer highlighted this point while pressing for his application.
On the other hand, Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer, Advocate Milind Pawar, opposed the application strongly. He argued that it was for the complainant to prove the case with evidence, and once the Magistrate had already taken cognisance of the complaint, the stage of enquiry under Section 202 CrPC was over.
According to him, the court cannot be asked again and again to demand new police reports just to strengthen the complainant’s side.
Pawar further argued that this case is a criminal matter under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and not a civil dispute. He said the Magistrate had no authority to interfere with Gandhi’s personal liberty in such a manner.
He stressed that Gandhi cannot be restricted by the court from deleting the video, since such restrictions would violate his rights.
Judicial Magistrate Amol Shinde agreed with Pawar’s legal submissions. He explained that the purpose of a Section 202 CrPC report is only to help the Magistrate decide whether or not to issue process against the accused. Once the report is filed, the enquiry ends there.
The case must now move ahead, and the complainant is required to bring proper evidence to court and prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
ALSO READ: CJI Gavai on Bulldozer Verdict: “Immense Satisfaction as It Dealt with Human Problems”
Magistrate Shinde clearly underlined this point by stating,
“The complainant has filed the CD of the alleged defamatory video. That can be relied upon by the Court during trial.”
The dispute is about a video in which Rahul Gandhi allegedly made remarks against the Savarkar family during his visit to the United Kingdom.
Satyaki Savarkar claims those remarks are defamatory and damaging to the family’s reputation. With the Magistrate’s latest order, the trial will now continue on the basis of evidence brought by both parties.
Click Here To Read More Reports on CJI Gavai
