Yesterday, the Bombay High Court extends the interim relief granted to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi till August 2 from appearance before a court here in a defamation complaint on his alleged remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2018.

A single-headed bench of Justice SV Kotwal adjourned the hearing on the plea filed by Rahul Gandhi challenging the summons issued to him by the local court in 2021 after the complainant's lawyer sought time.

The complainant, who claims to be a BJP worker, had alleged that Mr Gandhi's "commander-in-thief" remark in the context of the Rafale fighter jet deal amounted to defamation.

"The interim relief granted earlier to continue till August 2," Justice Kotwal said.

Earlier, the Court directed Rahul Gandhi to appear before it in November 2021 in a defamation complaint filed by Mahesh Shrishrimal.

Thereafter, Rahul Gandhi approached the High Court, challenging the summons issued to him.

Back in November 2021, Bombay High Court directed the magistrate to defer hearing on the defamation complaint, which meant the Congress leader would not be required to appear before the magistrate.

Since then, hearing on Mr Gandhi's plea has been adjourned from time to time and the interim relief granted to him was also extended.

The magistrate initiated criminal proceedings against Mr Gandhi in August 2019. However, the Congress leader in his petition before the high court claimed that he learned about the same only in July 2021.

The complainant alleged that Mr Gandhi made defamatory statements against PM Modi at a rally held in Rajasthan in September 2018.

As per the complaint, four days later (after the rally), Rahul Gandhi purportedly commented on a video and posted on his personal Twitter account: "The sad truth about India's commander in thief."

The complainant alleged that Mr Gandhi was making "defamatory statements against Modi and by calling him 'Commander in Thief' made a direct allegation of theft against all members of BJP and Indian citizens connected to PM Modi".

In his petition filed through advocate Kushal Mor, Mr Gandhi stated that the instant complaint was a classic example of frivolous and vexatious litigation motivated by the sole purpose of furthering the complainant's latent political agenda.

The petition said the complainant had no locus to file the complaint, since defamation can be initiated only by the person who has been allegedly defamed.

The Congress leader had sought to quash the order of the magistrate and a stay on the proceedings pending the hearing of the petition.

Notably, a court in Surat had convicted Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case over his "Modi surname" remark and sentenced him to two years in the jail. The decision had led to his disqualification as a Member of Parliament.