BJP Leader Subramanian Swamy Plea Against Rahul Gandhi’s Indian Citizenship will be Treated as “Public Interest Litigation”: Delhi High Court

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Justice Sanjeev Narula directed that the case be sent to the PIL roster bench, noting that Swamy had not demonstrated any “enforceable constitutional rights” that would warrant writ directions to the MHA.

NEW DELHI: On Tuesday(20th Aug): The Delhi High Court decided that the petition filed by former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy, which seeks a direction for the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to reconsider the Indian citizenship of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, will be treated as a public interest litigation (PIL).

Justice Sanjeev Narula directed that the case be sent to the PIL roster bench, noting that Swamy had not demonstrated any “enforceable constitutional rights” that would warrant writ directions to the MHA. Nevertheless, the court acknowledged Swamy’s argument that the matter involves public interest and thus will be addressed by the PIL roster bench.

The Division Bench led by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan is responsible for the PIL roster.

Justice Narula emphasized that

no comments had been made on the merits of the case.

Swamy’s petition requests that the MHA be directed to review his representation regarding the cancellation of Rahul Gandhi’s Indian citizenship.

The petition, submitted by advocate Satya Sabharwal, noted that Swamy had addressed a letter to the Ministry of Home Affairs on August 6, 2019, alleging “violations” by Rahul Gandhi. Swamy asserted that Gandhi had “voluntarily disclosed” his British citizenship to the British government, which would imply that he held a British passport.

Swamy argued that Gandhi’s actions contravened Article 9 of the Indian Constitution and the Indian Citizenship Act, potentially resulting in the forfeiture of his Indian citizenship. He also mentioned that despite multiple inquiries to the ministry about his complaint, he had not received any response or action on the matter.

The MHA had requested clarification from Gandhi on April 29, 2019, but Swamy argues that no resolution has been provided to date.

Swamy argued his case in person, supported by Advocate Satya Sabharwal, while Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma represented the Union of India.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE

author

Minakshi Bindhani

LL.M( Criminal Law)| BA.LL.B (Hons)

Similar Posts