In the Rahul Gandhi Sikh remarks case, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed a challenge to a Varanasi court’s refusal to order an FIR against the Leader of Opposition over comments he made during his September 2024 visit to the United States.
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) filed by Nageshwar Mishra and another, who had challenged an October 2025 order of a Varanasi court refusing to direct registration of an FIR against Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi [Nageshwar Mishra & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr. (case title to be verified)].
The petition was dismissed on November 5, 2026 by a single-judge Bench of Justice Vikram D. Chauhan. A detailed order is awaited.
The Magistrate’s order under challenge
In October 2025, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of the MP/MLA Court in Varanasi rejected the application filed under Section 173(4) BNSS seeking an FIR over Gandhi’s remarks about the Sikh community. The Magistrate observed that the applicants had only expressed an apprehension that the speech could be used by Khalistani terrorists to spread violence and propaganda, but had not produced any concrete evidence of an incident or event supporting that apprehension.
ALSO READ: Remarks on Sikh: Court Rejects FIR Petition Against Rahul Gandhi
How the case reached the High Court
The complaint was first dismissed by the trial court on November 28, 2024. The applicants then filed a criminal revision. The revisional court sent the matter back, directing the Magistrate to reconsider it with respect to the US speech in light of the Supreme Court’s orders, and clarified that prior sanction from the Central Government was not required to investigate speeches made outside India.
Gandhi challenged that direction for reconsideration, and the Allahabad High Court rejected his petition in September 2025. After reconsidering the matter, the Magistrate again rejected the application in October 2025. That order was challenged in the present petition.
What the applicants alleged
According to the applicants, Gandhi, during his US visit in September 2024, questioned whether Sikhs in India felt safe wearing turbans or visiting gurdwaras. They alleged that his statements were meant to incite people for his political interests, and pointed out that Khalistani separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun had endorsed the statement, which, in their view, made the work of Khalistani terrorists easier. They also claimed the remarks could provoke violence in India and aid anti-India propaganda abroad.
The plea compared the alleged impact of the comments to Gandhi’s speeches at the ‘Bharat Bachao Rally’ at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan in December 2019, which, it claimed, led to the Shaheen Bagh protests and later riots. It also relied on a statement attributed to Congress leader Salman Khurshid, which the applicants said showed a conspiracy. These were allegations made by the applicants; the Magistrate found no concrete material to support them, and the High Court has now declined to interfere with that finding.
Why the order matters
The ruling closes, for now, a two-year attempt to have a criminal case registered over a political speech made abroad. It reflects the settled approach that a court is not bound to order an FIR under Section 173(4) BNSS merely because an application alleges that a speech may cause harm; there must be material showing that a cognisable offence is made out. Political speech, however sharp, is tested on evidence and not on apprehension. The applicants may still pursue further remedies, and the reasons recorded by Justice Chauhan in the detailed order will indicate how the Court weighed the material placed before it.
Case Title: Nageshwar Mishra & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr. (case title to be verified)
Bench: Justice Vikram D. Chauhan, Allahabad High Court
Date of Order: November 5, 2026
Provision: Section 528 BNSS, arising from an application under Section 173(4) BNSS