Rahul Gandhi eligible to return to Parliament as early as Monday
The Lok Sabha secretariat in May revoked the disqualification of Lakshadweep MP Mohammad Faizal two months after the Kerala high court suspended his conviction in a criminal case
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is eligible to return to Parliament as early as Monday, two officials said as the Supreme Court on Friday stayed his conviction in a criminal defamation case and paved the way for the revival of his membership of the House. The officials added the Lok Sabha Secretariat has to issue a notice before the revival saying Gandhi’s suspension has been removed following the court’s decision.

The secretariat will consider revoking the suspension only after getting a copy of the court order. “The order will be studied and then a decision will be taken,” said a Lok Sabha official, requesting anonymity.
The secretariat in May revoked the disqualification of Lakshadweep member of Parliament (MP) Mohammad Faizal two months after the Kerala high court suspended his conviction and 10-year sentence in a criminal case.
The notice in Faizal’s case came ahead of the Supreme Court’s hearing on his plea challenging the secretariat’s refusal to restore the membership despite the high court staying the conviction.
Gandhi is eligible to return a day before the two-day debate on the no-confidence against the government is scheduled to begin on Tuesday in the Lok Sabha followed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reply on Thursday. The motion poses no threat to the government, which commands a majority in the Lower House. The Opposition has maintained it wants to use the debate to try and corner the government over the continuing violence in Manipur.
On July 20, 2018, the first no-confidence motion against the Modi government was defeated. Gandhi crossed to the treasury benches and hugged Modi during the debate on that motion.
The Supreme Court stayed Gandhi’s conviction on the grounds that the trial judge in Gujarat in March failed to explain why Gandhi deserved the maximum punishment in the case related to his comments on the Modi surname. It said the continuation of his disqualification would deprive the people of his constituency of a proper representation in Parliament.
A bench of justices BR Gavai and PS Narasimha said that Gandhi, who was elected as an MP from Kerala’s Wayanad in 2019, ought to have been “more careful” in making remarks due to his public standing. It said he was disqualified as an MP under the Representation of People Act only because of the two-year jail term and that even a day less would have saved his membership.
The court said it was imperative for the trial court to specify the reasons for handing him out the maximum punishment under the charge of defamation when the offence is categorised as bailable, non-cognisable, and compoundable.
The court clarified that the stay on Gandhi’s conviction would operate until the Gujarat sessions court, where his appeal against the conviction order of the Surat trial court is pending, finally decides the matter.
In an affidavit on Wednesday, Gandhi submitted in the Supreme Court that he would not apologise to settle the criminal defamation case Bharatiya Janata Party’s Purnesh Modi filed against him over his remarks at a poll rally in 2019. He maintained that his conviction is unsustainable and that he has an “excellent” chance of success in his appeal.
The stay will also allow Gandhi to contest the national elections due next year.
Gandhi approached the top court last month, challenging the Gujarat high court order that refused to put on hold his conviction and the two-year jail term. The high court said the Congress leader “breached modesty” and that his offence involved “moral turpitude”.
Gandhi urged the top court to immediately stay his conviction to enable him to regain his MP status, arguing the conviction order would lead to throttling of free speech, free expression, free thought, and free statement.
“It would contribute to the systematic, repetitive emasculation of democratic institutions and the consequent strangulation of democracy which would be gravely detrimental to the political climate and future of India.”