Court emphasizes the need for expeditious resolution in long-standing defamation case involving Congress leader.
The Gauhati High Court has annulled a lower court ruling that permitted the inclusion of additional witnesses in a defamation case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, according to reports from PTI. This decision came through an order issued on Monday by Justice Arun Dev Choudhury, who found fault with the additional sessions judge’s earlier ruling from September 2023. The case in question has been ongoing for nine years, dating back to its inception in 2016.
The defamation complaint was lodged by Anjan Kumar Bora, a worker of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), following remarks made by Gandhi during a visit to Assam’s Barpeta Satra in 2015. During that visit, Gandhi alleged that RSS workers had obstructed his entry, leading Bora to claim that the statements made by the Congress leader were both false and defamatory.
In his ruling, Justice Choudhury characterized the application for summoning new witnesses as “vague and bereft of particulars.” He upheld the earlier decision made by the trial court magistrate in March 2023, which had rejected the request for additional witnesses. The judge criticized the additional sessions court for what he described as a “mechanical interference” with a reasoned order, asserting that the court had not identified any procedural errors or demonstrated a necessity for new testimonies.
The High Court’s order further instructed the trial court to expedite the conclusion of the proceedings, underscoring the fact that Gandhi is a sitting Member of Parliament and highlighting the protracted nature of the case. By directing a swift resolution, the court aims to bring closure to a matter that has lingered for several years, impacting both the parties involved and the public discourse surrounding the case.
Local impact may differ by region; much depends on on-ground execution and coordination.
Further details are expected as agencies align on next steps and documentation.
Communication from officials often clarifies procedures, interim measures and any phased rollouts.
Stakeholders typically watch for clear timelines, responsibilities and implementation steps.
The sequence of updates will shape how the story evolves over the next few days.
Officials indicated further operational details may follow. The timeline will likely depend on administrative clearances and on-ground inputs.
