- 04 June | MGP Strategy Series | GS Paper 4 (Ethics) with AIR 7 A.R. Rajah Mohaideen Click Here to register for the session →
- 04 June | GS Advance Program begins from 4th June 2026 | First 2 classes open to all Click Here to register for the event →
- 05 June | MGP Strategy Series | GS Paper 3 Strategy Session with AIR 406 Mannat Luthra Click Here to register for the session
- 06 June | Open Orientation on Essay Guidance Program (EGP 2026) Click Here to register →
- 07 June | Open Orientation for Current Affairs for Mains 2026 Click Here to register →
- 07 June | Sociology Optional Strategy Session with AIR 10 Ujjwal Priyank Click Here to register →
Source: The post is based on the article “Bin This Law: SC’s Rahul call reminds why we must decriminalize defamation” published in “Times of India” on 5th August 2023.
Syllabus: GS2- Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary
News: Rahul Gandhi was convicted by a Surat court of criminal defamation and given a two-year sentence, disqualifying him from Lok Sabha. The Supreme Court (SC) later stayed this conviction. This article criticizes the defamation law as outdated and misused. It suggests this law should be removed.
About criminal defamation law
Read here: Criminal defamation in India – Explained, pointwise
Why did the Supreme Court put a stay on the Surat court’s order for Rahul Gandhi on criminal defamation?
The Supreme Court put a stay on the Surat court’s order for Rahul Gandhi on criminal defamation for these reasons:
Abuse of Defamation Provision: The Supreme Court observed that the defamation law had been misused in this case.
Maximum Sentence without Reason: The trial judge gave Rahul the maximum two-year sentence without explaining why.
Impact on Representation: Rahul’s two-year sentence disqualified him from Lok Sabha, affecting not just him but his entire constituency.
Colonial Nature of Law: The article mentions the defamation law as having a “colonial sting”, hinting that it’s outdated.
Ambiguous Wording: The law’s vague terms allow it to be used against various speech acts, from dissent to satire.
What should be done?
Review Defamation Law: The criminal defamation provision has been misused, suggesting a need for review.
Clear Sentencing Guidelines: Judges should provide clear reasons when giving maximum sentences.
Protect Representation: Ensure that legal decisions don’t unjustly affect entire constituencies.
Clarify Law Wording: Make defamation law clear to prevent misuse against dissent, humor, or satire.
