The Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea seeking an FIR against Rahul Gandhi for his 2025 remark stating he was “fighting BJP, RSS and the Indian State itself.” The Court found no grounds to initiate criminal proceedings over the statement.
The Allahabad High Court on Friday rejected a plea seeking directions for the registration of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over an alleged controversial statement made in 2025.
The order was delivered by Justice Vikram D Chauhan while hearing a petition filed by Simran Gupta, who had challenged a Sambhal court’s decision refusing her request to initiate criminal proceedings against Gandhi, currently serving as the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
The dismissal of the petition by the Allahabad High Court against Rahul Gandhi has its origins in a controversy arising from remarks allegedly made by the Congress leader during a political event in 2025.
The matter progressed through several judicial stages before reaching the High Court, involving both procedural scrutiny and substantive legal questions.
The issue began when Rahul Gandhi, who serves as the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, reportedly stated during the inauguration of the All India Congress Committee office that his political struggle was against the BJP, the RSS, and the “Indian state.” Certain groups viewed this statement as controversial and claimed that it offended public sentiments, which led to the filing of a complaint seeking criminal proceedings against him.
Subsequently, an application was filed before a court in Sambhal requesting the registration of an FIR against Gandhi. However, the Sambhal court declined to grant this request. The complainant then pursued a revision petition, which was also dismissed. Following these setbacks, the petitioner approached the High Court, challenging the refusal of the lower court to direct the registration of an FIR.
When the case was taken up by the High Court earlier in 2026, the Court identified procedural deficiencies in the petition. It observed that the plea did not clearly establish the grounds for interfering with the Sambhal court’s decision. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to file a supplementary affidavit to address these shortcomings, indicating that the Court was willing to consider the matter, provided adequate legal justification was presented.
The matter was eventually heard by a bench led by Justice Vikram D Chauhan. In its latest ruling, the High Court dismissed the petition, thereby affirming the decision of the Sambhal court to refuse the registration of an FIR against Rahul Gandhi.
Although the detailed order is still awaited, the dismissal suggests that the Court found no sufficient legal grounds to interfere with the earlier ruling.
This case highlights the legal standards that must be met for directing the registration of an FIR, particularly in matters involving political speech. Courts generally assess whether the complaint discloses a cognizable offence and whether the procedural requirements have been properly followed. In this instance, both the trial court and the High Court appear to have concluded at least at a preliminary stage that the criteria for directing an FIR were not fulfilled.
Overall, the dispute arose from a politically sensitive statement, but the outcome reflects the judiciary’s cautious approach toward criminalising political expression in the absence of clear legal justification. The detailed order, once released, is expected to provide further insight into the reasoning and legal principles applied in this case.