The Karnataka High Court dismissed a PIL against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for allegedly making objectionable remarks about “mass rape” by former Hassan MP Prajwal Revanna. The court ruled that the issue was not suitable for a Public Interest Litigation, stating it could not address the matter’s merits under such a petition.
Bengaluru: Today, on October 21st, in a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for making alleged objectionable remarks during a public speech. The petition, filed by the All India Dalit Action Committee, revolved around a controversial statement made by Gandhi, where he allegedly claimed that “mass rape” had been committed by former Hassan MP Prajwal Revanna.
The PIL sought action against Rahul Gandhi for what the petitioners described as “unconstitutional speeches” and demanded that Gandhi offer an unconditional apology to the women allegedly affected by his remarks.
A Karnataka High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind, dismissed the petition, stating that the issue raised in the PIL did not fall under the scope of public interest litigation. The court clarified its position during the hearing by emphasizing,
Read Also: “Original Parent Document Not Necessary To Transfer Property”: Madras High Court
“We have not said anything on merits, we are not saying on the merits of the speech. We have only said this cannot be subject matter under public interest litigation.”
Background of the Petition
The controversy stemmed from a speech delivered by Rahul Gandhi during election rallies on May 2, ahead of the May 7 polls in Shivamogga and Raichur. In these rallies, the Congress leader allegedly made remarks accusing former Hassan MP Prajwal Revanna of involvement in “mass rape” incidents, which the petitioner argued had caused widespread distress and harm within the community.
According to the petition, Gandhi’s comments had a negative impact on Hassan, a relatively small town, with the petitioners claiming that Gandhi’s alleged “hate speech” had created tensions among the local population. “Households are affected by the hate speech and every household is doubting the other household now,” the counsel for the petitioner stated in court, stressing the disruptive nature of Gandhi’s statements.
Court’s Dismissal
Despite the petitioners’ claims, the court determined that the issue raised did not warrant judicial intervention through a PIL. The Karnataka High Court made it clear that the matter of Gandhi’s alleged hate speech was not something that could be addressed within the framework of a Public Interest Litigation, as the court noted that such personal allegations do not inherently constitute a matter of public interest.
Read Also: NCLAT Upholds Central Government Takeover of Delhi Gymkhana Club
The dismissal of the PIL is seen as a relief for Rahul Gandhi, as it eliminates the immediate legal challenge posed by the petitioners’ demands for an apology. The Congress leader had not issued any public comment regarding the petition or the allegations at the time of the hearing.
This legal decision serves as a precedent, setting a boundary for what can and cannot be addressed under PILs, especially in politically charged cases involving allegations of defamation or hate speech. The Karnataka HC’s ruling underscores the fact that not all grievances, even those involving prominent political figures, qualify for consideration under the PIL mechanism.
Conclusion
The Karnataka High Court’s ruling brings closure to this specific legal attempt to hold Rahul Gandhi accountable for his controversial remarks. However, it remains to be seen whether other legal avenues will be pursued in relation to the speech.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
