Varanasi court asks Magistrate to reconsider plea for FIR against Rahul Gandhi over ‘objectionable’ statement against Sikhs

The petition also alleged that Gandhi had earlier engaged in similar ‘propaganda’ during a rally at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan on December 14, 2019, which allegedly influenced the Shaheen Bagh protests that turned violent

A Varanasi MP-MLA court on 22 July (Monday) allowed a plea seeking the registration of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over his remarks about the Sikh community during a visit to the United States in 2024.

The petition, filed by one Nageshwar Mishra, accused Gandhi of making inflammatory statements that allegedly hurt Sikh sentiments. It has also been claimed in the petition that Khalistani terrorist Gurwant Singh Pannu had supported Gandhi's statement.

While hearing a revision plea filed by one filed by Mishra, judge Yajuvendra Vikram Singh directed the concerned Magistrate to reconsider the matter afresh after taking into account the relevant Supreme Court precedents, and then pass a new order, Bar and Bench reported.

Initially, the plea was dismissed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Special MP-MLA Court) on November 28, 2024. The magistrate ruled that under the proviso to Section 208 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), offences committed outside India cannot be inquired into or tried in Indian courts without prior sanction from the Central Government. The court also noted that there was no mention of any specific objectionable portion of Gandhi’s speech in Delhi that could amount to a cognizable offence.

Following the dismissal, Mishra filed a revision petition in the sessions court. On July 22, Additional District and Sessions Judge (MP-MLA Court) Yajuvendra Vikram Singh set aside the magistrate's order and directed a fresh hearing.

“Criminal Revision No. 61 of 2025, Nageshwar Mishra & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others, is allowed… The impugned order dated 28.11.2024… is set aside… The learned Magistrate is directed to rehear the matter in light of this revision order and in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court,” the court ruled.

In his order, Judge Singh clarified that the term ‘inquiry’ under the proviso to Section 208 of the BNSS refers to the post-cognizance stage—after the charge sheet has been filed and charges framed. Therefore, the requirement for prior government sanction does not apply at the stage of initial cognizance.

The petition also alleged that Gandhi had earlier engaged in similar ‘propaganda’ during a rally at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan on December 14, 2019, which allegedly influenced the Shaheen Bagh protests that turned violent.

The case has now been remanded to the concerned magistrate, who has been instructed to reconsider the matter afresh.

"Criminal Revision No. 61 of 2025, Nageshwar Mishra & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others, is allowed...The impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the learned Magistrate on Application No. 3200/2024 in the case of Nageshwar Mishra & Others vs. Rahul Gandhi is set aside...The learned Magistrate is directed to rehear the matter in light of this revision order and in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and to ensure that a fresh order is passed in accordance with law," the court has been quoted as saying.