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
Kerala HC seeks Customs' stand on Dulquer Salmaan's plea to release seized vehicle
Everyone is aware of our position on Kashmir: MEA after Turkey's Erdogan raises issue at UN
Sangita Jindal Conferred Prestigious French Honour For Arts And Heritage Work
7 vital passport checks for any Brit going to EU after border change
Asia Cup: Harris Rauf Fined 30 Pc Of Match Fee, Shahibzada Farhan Reprimanded By ICC: Report
