Congress MP Rahul Gandhi received significant legal relief from the Supreme Court in connection with his controversial remarks made against freedom fighter Veer Savarkar during the 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra. The top court ordered the complete quashing of the summons and criminal proceedings initiated by a Lucknow magistrate court. The decision was rendered primarily because the Uttar Pradesh state government had not granted the mandatory statutory sanction required to prosecute the matter.
Court Proceedings and the Sanction Requirement
During the hearing, a bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta directly inquired of Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj, representing the Uttar Pradesh government, whether the state had authorized the prosecution. The Additional Solicitor General confirmed that no such sanction had been issued by the state government. Highlighting statutory compliance, the bench emphasized that a criminal case cannot proceed without prerequisite government approval. Consequently, the court ruled that without proper sanction under the law, the lower court proceedings lacked legal standing.
Origins of the Savarkar Remark Controversy
The origin of the legal dispute traces back to November 2022 during the Maharashtra leg of the Bharat Jodo Yatra. Rahul Gandhi made public statements regarding Savarkar, terming him a servant of the British and alleging that he accepted a stipend from the colonial administration. Following these remarks, lawyer Nripendra Pandey filed a complaint in a Lucknow magistrate court. Taking prima facie note of the charges under IPC Section 153(A) and IPC Section 505, the lower court had issued summons to Rahul Gandhi, which now stand voided by the top court.
Prior Hearing and Stern Judicial Caution
In July of the previous year, the Supreme Court had granted an interim stay on the execution of the magistrate court's summons. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi along with advocate Prasanna S. had represented Rahul Gandhi in those proceedings. At that juncture, the court delivered a stern admonition regarding public remarks made about freedom fighters who secured the nation's independence. Justice Datta explicitly cautioned the Leader of Opposition that any recurrence of similar comments in the future would invite direct suo motu action by the Supreme Court, bypassing any requirement for executive sanction.
Parallel Legal Petitions in Top Court
Apart from the Savarkar defamation case, Rahul Gandhi has also approached the Supreme Court challenging an order passed by the Allahabad High Court. That high court order had directed investigatory agencies including the ED and CBI to probe an alleged disproportionate assets matter, which remains pending for consideration before the apex tribunal.
