In a recent turn of events, a Delhi court has declined the request to acquit Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot in a defamation case filed by Union Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat.
Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur, who represented Gehlot, put forth the argument based on Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which pertains to the
“non-appearance or death of complainant.”
Mathur emphasized that if the complainant remains absent without a valid reason, the accused should be acquitted. He further elaborated that this section is applicable
“on every date and every stage,”
not just during the evidence phase. He highlighted that Shekhawat had not sought any exemption from appearance for two specific dates.
Countering this, Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, representing Shekhawat, clarified that Section 256 of CrPC comes into play only when the matter is awaiting evidence, which is after the framing of notice. Pahwa also pointed out the proviso to Section 256, CrPC, which states that if the party is represented by a lawyer, no orders can be passed under this provision.
ACMM Singh, in his observation, mentioned that the primary objective of Section 256 is to safeguard the accused from any intentional delay in the trial by the complainant. The court can exercise its discretion under this law only when it believes that the complainant’s absence is deliberate, with the intent to prolong the trial and thereby extend the accused’s suffering.
In this particular case, the court deduced that the circumstances did not suggest any deliberate absence on the part of the complainant. The application filed by Gehlot was subsequently dismissed. The court remarked,
“The conduct of the complainant is of immense significance and an absence on mere two dates and that too complainant was represented by his counsels and when the attendance of the complainant was not necessary for the proceedings of the day, cannot be called a justifiable ground to exercise the discretion u/s 256 Cr.PC, so as to acquit the accused.”
This decision has added another layer to the ongoing legal battle between the two political figures, and further developments are keenly awaited.