SC quashes criminal defamation case against RaGa

The Supreme Court on Friday quashed the criminal defamation proceedings initiated against Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi over his remarks on Hindutva ideologue V.D. Savarkar.

The apex court held that the prosecution could not proceed as the Uttar Pradesh government had not given the requisite sanction to go ahead.

A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu allowed his plea after noting that the criminal case lacked the particular sanction required under the law to prosecute Gandhi in the case.

A Bench of the top court granted relief to the Congress leader after being informed that the mandatory approval from the Uttar Pradesh government for prosecution in the case had not been obtained.

Consequently, the Court set aside the summons issued to Gandhi by a lower court.

The case stems from remarks made by Rahul Gandhi during the Congress party's Bharat Jodo Yatra in Maharashtra in 2022. During one of his public addresses, Gandhi described Savarkar as a “servant of the British” and alleged that the freedom fighter “used to receive a pension from the British”.

The comments had triggered controversy, with lawyer Nripendra Pandey filing a complaint before a lower court, alleging that the statements were defamatory and promoted disharmony.

After examining the complaint, the lower court had found a prima facie case, issuing summons to Gandhi under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code.

However, during the proceedings before the Supreme Court, it was brought to the Court's notice that the prosecution had not secured the necessary sanction from the Uttar Pradesh government, a legal requirement for proceeding with such offences.

Taking note of this procedural lapse, the apex court quashed the criminal proceedings and the summons issued against the Congress leader.

The ruling marks a significant legal relief for Gandhi, who has faced multiple criminal and civil proceedings arising from his political speeches and public remarks in recent years. The Supreme Court's decision effectively brings an end to the case linked to his comments on Savarkar.