After a Particular MP/MLA Courtroom in Pune rejected his plea to intervene within the ongoing felony defamation case in opposition to Congress chief Rahul Gandhi for allegedly defaming right-wing ideologue Vinayak Savarkar, Pankaj Phadnis has moved the Bombay Excessive Courtroom claiming that the particular court docket is coping with points far exterior its jurisdiction and is making an attempt to find out whether or not Savarkar was courageous or a coward.
Phadnis, a professor by occupation, claims to have ‘knowledgeable data’ about Savarkar’s life, had final week filed an intervention software within the defamation proceedings initiated in opposition to Gandhi on the behest of Savarkar’s grand-nephew Satyaki Savarkar.
Nonetheless, Particular Choose Amol Shinde had rejected his plea and imposed Rs 20,000 prices on him for losing the court docket’s time.
Difficult this very order, Phadnis has now moved the Excessive Courtroom by submitting an interim software in a pending Public Curiosity Litigation (PIL) that he had filed in 2024 for creating consciousness about Savarkar. He has urged the Excessive Courtroom to remain the proceedings of the Savarkar Defamation Case in opposition to Gandhi and to additional appoint an Amicus to look at what all proof is taken on document, by the particular court docket, shouldn’t be related to the unique grievance filed by Satyaki in opposition to Gandhi.
In his interim software, Phadnis has accused the Particular Courtroom of indulging in judicial indiscipline by passing perverse order.
“The IA has being filed for bringing to note of this Courtroom that the proceedings within the Particular Courtroom in Pune is coping with points far exterior its jurisdiction – making an attempt to find out whether or not Savarkar was courageous or coward, indulging in judicial indiscipline and passing perverse orders,” the IA reads.
Additional, the petitioner claimed that he selected to intervene within the proceedings earlier than the Pune Courtroom after coming throughout a information report which said that Satyaki, in his cross-examination, has told the court that Savarkar filed 10 mercy petitions.
In his IA, Phadnis claimed that foundation his analysis on Savarkar, he has concluded that the right-wing ideologue is a superb individual and is worthy of respect. He cited sure views of Savarkar particularly on ‘secularism ‘, as to how completely different religions add ‘magnificence’ to Indian society like completely different colors make a ‘rainbow’ stunning.
Phadnis claimed that an incredible ‘disservice’ was achieved to Savarkar by a few of his followers like Godse, who ‘conspired to homicide Mahatma Gandhi, some who suppose minorities are to be thought of as ‘second class residents’, and so forth.
“I used to be shocked to see a newspaper report on June 15, 2026 that confirmed that the defamation case was continuing on topics that had nothing to do with the grievance filed by Satyaki in opposition to Gandhi. A person’s contribution to freedom wrestle and whether or not he was courageous or not can’t be subject material of judicial willpower. That lies within the area of the Parliament, which has already spoken on the topic by displaying his portrait within the Parliament by unanimous consent of all political events together with the Indian Nationwide Congress,” the plea reads.
Phadnis argues that the topic earlier than the Particular Courtroom in Pune is whether or not or not Savarkar, in any of his books, wrote something about him and his mates beating up a Muslim and being happy from the identical and that nothing past this very side may be mentioned within the mentioned court docket.
“Whether or not Savarkar was a coward and whether or not cowardice was his ideology can by no means be a matter of judicial willpower. That’s greatest left to the Parliament and the Authorities. The Particular Choose has exceeded his jurisdiction in allowing Gandhi and Satyaki to journey past the scope of the judicially determinable side of the grievance filed by Satyaki and get into areas of political historical past, which aren’t amenable to judicial adjudication,” the plea states.
Phadnis has additional accused the Particular Choose of exceeding his jurisdiction by ignoring his competition that he has a ‘proper to significant life’ below Article 21 of the Structure of India, which is being violated by Rahul Gandhi resulting from his fixed denigration of Savarkar, who he (Phadnis) and a really giant variety of Indians together with Prime Ministers reducing throughout the social gathering strains, maintain in excessive esteem.
The IA is prone to come up earlier than a division bench in the end.
The Supreme Courtroom had earlier refused to entertain a petition filed by Phadnis looking for steps to forestall insults to Savarkar.
Concerning the case in Pune Courtroom
The Pune Courtroom is dealing with a felony defamation grievance filed by Satyaki Savarkar, grandnephew of VD Savarkar, in opposition to Congress chief Rahul Gandhi over the latter’s remarks that Savarkar had boasted in his e-book about beating up a Muslim man.
Throughout cross-examination by Rahul Gandhi’s lawyer, Satyaki mentioned that Savarkar had written mercy letters to the British, and that the title “Swatantryaveer” was not conferred on him by any Authorities. Satyaki additional said that Savarkar had written a e-book criticising spiritual rituals, questioning the existence of God, and disapproving of the worship of cow as a deity. Satyaki further stated that Nathuram Godse and Gopal Godse have been lively RSS members.
Case Title: Prof Dr Pankaj Ok Phadnis vs Chief of Opposition in Lok Sabha [Interim Application (L) 28744 of 2026]
