The Supreme Court on Wednesday, September 9, asked the complainant in a criminal defamation case against Congress leader and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to follow the prescribed procedure and file an application seeking an early hearing. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, made the observation after senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for former Border Roads Organisation (BRO) director Uday Shankar Srivastava, raised concerns over the delay in listing Gandhi’s appeal. According to Bar and Bench, Bhatia argued that the matter had remained pending for months despite earlier directions and submitted that Gandhi was not a “VVIP”, suggesting that the delay did not reflect well on the institution. Responding to the submission, CJI Surya Kant said the complainant should follow the established procedure rather than seek a special listing. “Let us follow the procedure. File an application seeking early hearing. Everyone is equal before us. Please file an application for early hearing. We will take it up,” the Chief Justice said, as reported by Bar and Bench.
Case stems from LAC remarks
The case stems from remarks made by Gandhi during the Bharat Jodo Yatra in December 2022, following a clash between Indian and Chinese troops in Arunachal Pradesh. Gandhi had criticised the government’s handling of the situation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and alleged that Chinese troops were “beating up” Indian Army personnel. Srivastava subsequently approached a Lucknow magistrate, alleging that the remarks were defamatory and derogatory towards the Indian military. The magistrate took cognizance of the complaint and issued summons to Gandhi. The Allahabad High Court later refused to quash the proceedings, holding that Srivastava could qualify as an “aggrieved person” under Section 199 of the CrPC even though he was not personally targeted by the remarks.
Gandhi challenges proceedings in SC
Gandhi then challenged the proceedings before the Supreme Court. An earlier bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih had stayed the proceedings while questioning the basis for Gandhi’s statements and asking why such matters were being raised outside Parliament. The case remains pending before the top court. The latest proceedings do not amount to an order granting Gandhi or the complainant an immediate hearing. Instead, the Supreme Court directed the complainant to file a formal application for early listing, reiterating that the same procedure applies to everyone.
