The Allahabad High Court on Friday rejected Congress leader and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s plea challenging an order that sent a matter concerning a potential FIR against him back to the magistrate court for fresh hearing.
The case stems from statements Gandhi allegedly made in the United States in September 2024. Nageshwar Mishra from Varanasi had filed an application before the magistrate court handling MP/MLA cases in Varanasi, seeking registration of an FIR. He claimed that Gandhi had said during a programme in the US that the environment in India was not favourable for Sikhs. Mishra argued that the remarks had sparked protests and were provocative and divisive.
Initially, on 28 November 2024, the magistrate court had rejected the FIR application, noting that the speech was made outside India and therefore beyond its jurisdiction.
Mishra then approached the special MP/MLA sessions court, which allowed his revision petition and sent the matter back to the magistrate for fresh consideration.
During the hearing, senior advocate Gopal Chaturvedi, representing Gandhi, argued that Mishra’s application did not mention the exact date of the alleged statement.
Additional Advocate General Manish Goel countered, saying that the High Court needed to examine whether there was a prima facie case and whether the magistrate should decide it. He added that since the statement was reportedly made on foreign soil by the Leader of Opposition against India, it required investigation, and there was acknowledgment that Gandhi had indeed made some remarks.
Justice Sameer Jain was hearing the plea filed by Gandhi when the High Court dismissed it.
The case stems from statements Gandhi allegedly made in the United States in September 2024. Nageshwar Mishra from Varanasi had filed an application before the magistrate court handling MP/MLA cases in Varanasi, seeking registration of an FIR. He claimed that Gandhi had said during a programme in the US that the environment in India was not favourable for Sikhs. Mishra argued that the remarks had sparked protests and were provocative and divisive.
Initially, on 28 November 2024, the magistrate court had rejected the FIR application, noting that the speech was made outside India and therefore beyond its jurisdiction.
Mishra then approached the special MP/MLA sessions court, which allowed his revision petition and sent the matter back to the magistrate for fresh consideration.
During the hearing, senior advocate Gopal Chaturvedi, representing Gandhi, argued that Mishra’s application did not mention the exact date of the alleged statement.
Additional Advocate General Manish Goel countered, saying that the High Court needed to examine whether there was a prima facie case and whether the magistrate should decide it. He added that since the statement was reportedly made on foreign soil by the Leader of Opposition against India, it required investigation, and there was acknowledgment that Gandhi had indeed made some remarks.
Justice Sameer Jain was hearing the plea filed by Gandhi when the High Court dismissed it.
You may also like
'Not for Maharashtra': Shrikant Shinde slams MNS, UBT alliance; says tie-up is 'family politics'
Shaktipeeth: If you are going to visit the Shaktipeeth Maa Naina Devi during Navratri, then first know these new rules..
BREAKING: Match cancelled over safety concerns after former Arsenal striker's death at stadium
Enzo Maresca provides Cole Palmer injury update as Chelsea suffer fresh blow ahead of Brighton
“Delhi On Phone With Putin”: NATO Chief Claims Modi Raised Ukraine Strategy, Highlights US Tariffs
