The Allahabad High Court has reserved its decision after hearing a petition presented by Rahul Gandhi, a prominent Congress MP and the Leader of the Opposition. The petition challenges a ruling made by the Special Judge of the MP-MLA Court in Varanasi.
Following the hearing on the revision petition filed by Rahul Gandhi, Justice Samir Jain reserved the judgment. The Special Judge’s (MP-MLA Court) order will remain suspended until the final decision is delivered.
Gandhi approached the High Court to contest the MP-MLA court’s directive. The Special Judge had forwarded a petition, which sought an FIR against Rahul Gandhi, to the ACJM Court for reconsideration. This led to the Congress leader filing an appeal with the Allahabad High Court. The matter at hand centers on comments Gandhi made about Sikhs in the United States in 2024.
Nageshwar Mishra of Varanasi initially filed an application with the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (MP-MLA) in Varanasi, requesting an FIR against Rahul Gandhi. The court rejected the application on November 28, citing lack of jurisdiction as the speech occurred in America.
Mishra challenged this dismissal in a revision court, which upheld his petition and instructed the ACJM Court to conduct a new hearing.
The events originated in September of the previous year. During a U.S. event, Rahul Gandhi reportedly stated that the environment for Sikhs in India was not positive. These remarks triggered significant criticism, with accusations of being inflammatory and divisive.
Mishra tried to file an FIR at a police station in Varanasi but was unsuccessful. He then petitioned the court to mandate the filing of an FIR against Gandhi. The judicial magistrate dismissed his petition, citing the jurisdictional limitations due to the location of the speech.
After the initial rejection, Mishra filed a revision petition in the Sessions Court, which was accepted on July 21 of this year. Consequently, Rahul Gandhi filed a revision petition with the Allahabad High Court, asserting that the Varanasi court’s decision was flawed, illegal, and beyond its jurisdiction.