Rahul Gandhi vs Indian Army row takes a legal twist as Advocate Ashok Pandey moves the Chief Justice of India, alleging Priyanka Gandhi Vadra made contemptuous remarks targeting the Supreme Court and seeks criminal contempt proceedings.
Advocate Ashok Pandey submitted a letter to the Chief Justice of India, requesting the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.
He accuses her of making “unwarranted and uncalled for comments” regarding the Supreme Court in reaction to oral observations made during a hearing related to Rahul Gandhi.
In his letter dated August 6, Pandey, who identifies himself as a judicial activist with over 200 public interest litigations, claims that Vadra’s public remarks constitute criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The context of this application pertains to SLP (Crl) No. 11753/2025, Rahul Gandhi v. State of UP & Another, which was recently reviewed by a bench including Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih.
This case involves comments made by Rahul Gandhi several years ago concerning the Chinese occupation of Indian territory and the Indian Army.
The trial court’s summoning order was challenged by Gandhi and subsequently reached the Supreme Court after being upheld by the Allahabad High Court.
During the hearing, the bench reportedly inquired about the evidence Gandhi had to substantiate his claim that China had occupied 2,000 sq. km of Indian land, remarking that “no true Bharatiya will make such a statement.”
Following this, Pandey asserts that a wave of criticism emerged on social media.
His letter notes,
“In comment, it was also said that the senior member of bench is trying to manage the Rajya Sabha or Lok Sabha seat for himself by making such remarks.”
Pandey alleges that Vadra was among the most prominent critics of the Court, stating,
“It is she who firstly made the offending comments and then her followers commented on line set up by Ms Priyanka Vadra.”
He argues that while prosecuting every individual who commented online may not be practical, the “instigators” should be held accountable to maintain the rule of law.
The letter also expresses Pandey’s frustration over what he describes as the inaction or delays by constitutional authorities, such as the Attorney General and Advocate Generals, in granting permission to prosecute those in contempt under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Citing past instances, including his own contempt conviction by the Allahabad High Court, he claims that “VIP citizens” often escape prosecution, which he argues encourages others to make disparaging remarks about the judiciary.
He concludes the letter with a request to the Chief Justice,
“Wherefore I most respectfully pray… to initiate the contempt proceeding against Ms Priyanka Vadra for committing the wilful and deliberate Contempt of Courts Act and after summoning, prosecute and punish her.”