New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday extended its interim stay on the summons issued to Congress MP and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, in connection with his remarks about freedom fighter Vinayak Damodar Savarkar during the 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra.
The case was adjourned for four weeks by a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih. The complainant, advocate Nripendra Pandey, was granted time to file a reply, and Gandhi was permitted to submit a rejoinder within two weeks of receiving it.
In a detailed affidavit, the Uttar Pradesh government defended the summons, stating that the Magistrate had thoroughly reviewed the case records, witness statements, and investigation materials before issuing the order. The affidavit said, “The Magistrate properly applied judicial mind to facts and evidence, determining a prima facie case under Sections 153-A and 505 IPC.”
The state argued that Gandhi’s remarks were part of a “deliberate spreading of hatred through pre-planned actions,” and therefore the relief sought by him should be denied. The affidavit further claimed that the Allahabad High Court’s refusal to quash the summons was both lawful and justified.
Rahul Gandhi had approached the Supreme Court to challenge the April 4 order of the Allahabad High Court, which declined to intervene in the summons issued to him by a Lucknow Magistrate on December 12, 2024. The summons was based on a complaint by Pandey, who alleged that Gandhi’s statements—calling Savarkar a British servant who accepted a pension—were inflammatory and aimed at creating societal discord.
During earlier proceedings, the High Court remarked that Gandhi had the option to seek relief before the Sessions Court under Section 397 of the CrPC rather than directly appealing to the High Court.
On April 25, 2025, the Supreme Court had granted interim protection to Gandhi by staying the trial court’s summons but issued a stern caution. The bench warned that any repeat of such controversial comments about national figures could result in “consequences.”
The matter remains pending and is now scheduled to be heard again in four weeks, by which time both sides are expected to complete their submissions.
