Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer argues against any leniency, citing his past criminal defamation cases and loss in Amethi. Complainant’s lawyer argues for larger public interest.

The court held a recess in the hearing regarding Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in a defamation case. The hearing was set to resume at 3 pm. Meanwhile, the complainant’s lawyer, Harshit Tolia, argued that Rahul Gandhi’s loss in the Amethi seat to Smriti Irani undermines his argument of thumping majority in the Wayanad seat. Tolia further argued that discretionary powers to suspend the sentence should not be exercised in Rahul Gandhi’s case as there are no exceptional circumstances or apology. He added that no leniency should be shown as being an MP, committing an offense becomes more grave. Tolia also cited various judgments on the discretionary powers of the court to stay or not stay the conviction, which needs to be done in rare cases.

On the other hand, Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer, Senior Advocate RS Cheema, argued that the court needs to consider the larger public interest, where an opposition should audit the government’s actions and hold them accountable. He further claimed that the judge was misled and harsh while pronouncing the sentence. Cheema tried to confuse the evidence that identified the complainant’s community and argued about the absurdity of the statement made by Rahul Gandhi.