CD Blank in Rahul Gandhi’s Savarkar Defamation Case, Court Rejects YouTube Video Request

CD Blank Controversy in Rahul Gandhi’s Savarkar Defamation Case: Court Denies YouTube Video Submission Amid Evidence Dispute

In a significant development in the ongoing Savarkar defamation case, a special MP/MLA court in Pune recently addressed a key evidence dispute involving Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The case stems from allegations that Gandhi defamed right-wing leader Vinayak Savarkar during a speech delivered in London. Satyaki, the grand-nephew of Savarkar, filed the criminal defamation complaint against Gandhi, claiming that the speech contained objectionable and derogatory remarks. The case has progressed to the stage of examination-in-chief of the complainant, with Special Judge Amol Shinde presiding over the matter.

The CD Issue in Court Proceedings
On November 14, the court attempted to examine the Compact Disc (CD) submitted by Satyaki, which purportedly contained the video of the alleged defamatory speech. However, when the CD was run on the court’s laptop and desktop systems, it was found to be completely blank. The absence of any data on the CD created a significant hurdle for the complainant, as it formed a primary piece of evidence to support the allegations. Satyaki had initially filed the CD alongside the mandatory certificate under section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, which is typically required to authenticate electronic records in court proceedings.

Request to Play YouTube Video Denied
Following the discovery that the CD was blank, Satyaki moved an application urging the court to directly play the speech video from Rahul Gandhi’s official YouTube channel. He even provided the link of the YouTube video to the court in support of his application. However, advocate Milind Pawar, representing Gandhi, objected to this request, arguing that Satyaki was not the owner of the YouTube channel and therefore could not authenticate the content. The legal question raised here was whether a URL linking to an online video could be considered admissible evidence under section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act without proper certification.

Read more: Delhi Air Quality Stays ‘Very Poor’ At 384 As Key Locations Cross 400, Pollution Crisis Deepens

Court’s Reasoning and Legal Standpoint
After hearing arguments from both sides, Judge Shinde ruled that the YouTube URL submitted by the complainant could not be played or admitted as evidence in court. The judge noted that while the CD submitted by Satyaki had a certificate under section 65B, this certificate did not extend to the URL mentioned in the complaint. Section 65B specifically governs electronic records, and the court clarified that without proper authentication, an online link cannot be treated as legally valid evidence. The judge further emphasized that the original CD lacked data, and thus, the complainant could not rely on the online video link to substantiate the case.

Implications of the Court Order
The court order effectively rejected the complainant’s application to use Rahul Gandhi’s YouTube video as evidence, highlighting the importance of proper certification and adherence to legal procedures when submitting electronic evidence. The ruling also underscores the strict interpretation of section 65B in Indian courts, which requires electronic records to be accompanied by a certificate that establishes authenticity and reliability. Without this, courts are reluctant to consider online content as credible evidence, even if it appears directly on a public platform.

Next Steps in the Savarkar Defamation Case
The special court noted that the case concerns a speech delivered in 2023, and the complainant bears the responsibility to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. With the CD found blank and the YouTube link inadmissible, Satyaki’s legal team may need to explore alternative evidence or witnesses to substantiate the claim. The court reiterated that the application had no merit under the current legal framework, and therefore, it was rejected.

Reasd more: Delhi High Court Declares Hermès’ Iconic Birkin Shape as Well-Known Trademarks in India

Conclusion
The CD issue in Rahul Gandhi’s Savarkar defamation case highlights a critical intersection of technology and law. Electronic evidence, especially content sourced from online platforms like YouTube, requires strict adherence to procedural rules for admissibility. The Pune court’s decision reinforces that even widely accessible digital material cannot substitute for properly certified records under the Indian Evidence Act. The case continues to unfold, and the focus now shifts to how the complainant will substantiate the allegations through legally admissible means.

We’re now on WhatsApp. Click to join.

Like this post?
Register at One World News to never miss out on videos, celeb interviews, and best reads.