NEW DELHI: Supreme Court mocked the courts in Gujarat while staying the verdict that found Rahul guilty in the Modi reference. A bench headed by Justice BR Gavai said that the trial court had given a lot of speech in awarding the maximum sentence even though it was a bailable and compoundable offence. Gavai quipped that many judgments coming from Gujarat are good fun to read. It was also mentioned 'the courts in the state of the Solicitor General'. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta is from Gujarat.

The arguments started around 12.10 pm yesterday. First it was the turn of Rahul's lawyer Abhishek Singhvi. Although Justice Gawai initially said that the parties would be allowed only 15 minutes, the hearing lasted for over an hour and a half.

Singhvi argued that the stay was necessary for Rahul to perform his parliamentary duties and contest the elections. There was no evidence against Rahul until a BJP activist named Ganesh Gyanchi stepped in on the Modi reference. He said that the person who was not in the premises of the case for 21 months suddenly appeared as a witness. Purnesh Modi, the petitioner, took the stand that anyone from the community can file a defamation case as Modi is a reference against the community. Purnesh's lawyer Mahesh Jatmalani alleged that Rahul had earlier said that the Supreme Court had described Narendra Modi as "chowkidar chor hai".

Judgement affects people also

Supreme Court clarified that the judgment of the trial court affects not only the rights of an individual but the entire people of the constituency. If a member representing a constituency is disqualified, is that not a reason to grant a stay, Justice Gawai asked and criticized the Surat Chief Judicial Magistrate for saying that being an MP does not confer special immunity. It was also asked how many of the political leaders who speak in ten or fifteen meetings a day remember what they said.