A magistrate court in Pune on Wednesday dismissed an application filed by Satyaki Savarkar, the grandnephew of Hindu ideologue Vinayak Savarkar, providing relief to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.
Savarkar had sought a police report from Vishrambag Police Station and a court directive to prevent Gandhi from deleting a YouTube video alleged to contain defamatory content. The court’s ruling marked a significant development in the ongoing legal dispute.
Judicial Magistrate Amol Shinde, presiding over the case, rejected the plea, stating that Gandhi’s personal liberty could not be curtailed at this stage by restricting him from deleting the video. The magistrate noted, “The complainant has filed the CD of the alleged defamatory video. That can be relied upon by the court during trial,” emphasising that the evidence submitted by Savarkar was sufficient for the trial to proceed without additional restrictions on Gandhi.
The application, filed through Savarkar’s lawyer Sangram Kolhatkar, requested two key actions: an update on the Vishrambag Police Station’s investigation into the alleged defamatory video posted on YouTube and a court order to prohibit Gandhi from removing the content. According to court records, the Vishrambag Police had submitted a report under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in May 2024, detailing their efforts to obtain information from YouTube regarding the IP address, channel profile, and email ID associated with Gandhi’s account. However, Savarkar’s counsel highlighted that no further updates had been provided to the court since that submission.
Also Read: Tikait backs Rahul, says BJP ruling on ‘stolen votes’
Advocate Milind Pawar, representing Rahul Gandhi, opposed the application, arguing that the burden of proof lies with the complainant to substantiate the allegations with evidence. Pawar contended that the enquiry stage under Section 202 of the CrPC had concluded once the magistrate took cognisance of the case, and the court could not repeatedly demand fresh police reports to bolster the complainant’s case.
He further argued that, as the proceedings were criminal in nature under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and not civil, the magistrate lacked the jurisdiction to impose restrictions on Gandhi’s personal liberty, such as preventing him from deleting the video.
Also Read: Bihar polls countdown to Modi govt’s fall: Kharge
Magistrate Shinde agreed with Pawar’s arguments, clarifying that the purpose of a Section 202 report is solely to assist the court in determining whether to issue a process, and the enquiry concludes upon the report’s submission. The court emphasised that the complainant must now present evidence to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt during the trial.
The case revolves around a video allegedly posted by Rahul Gandhi, which Savarkar claims contains defamatory remarks made during Gandhi’s visit to the United Kingdom. With the court’s decision to dismiss Savarkar’s application, the trial is set to move forward, with both sides expected to present their evidence in the coming proceedings.
Also Read: Congress holds historic CWC meet in Bihar
Follow us
