The Allahabad High Court on Friday dismissed a petition that sought the registration of an FIR against Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, over his alleged controversial remark made during the inauguration of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) office in Sambhal district in 2025.
Court's Observation on Criticism in Democracy
Justice Vikram D Chauhan, while dismissing the petition filed by Simran Gupta, a resident of Sambhal, observed: 'In parliamentary democracy, criticism of government action or policies is not only permitted but is essential. Therefore, criticism or ideological difference may not by itself be an offence. The said exception also arises from the explanation provided under section 152 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.'
Background of the Case
Justice Chauhan had reserved the judgment on April 8 after hearing arguments from the petitioner's counsel and the state government counsel. Simran Gupta had filed the petition challenging an order by a Sambhal court that rejected an application seeking the registration of an FIR against Gandhi over his alleged remarks in 2025.
According to the petitioner, during the inauguration of the AICC office in 2025, Gandhi allegedly stated: 'We are now fighting the BJP, the RSS and the Indian state itself.' The petitioner claimed that this remark hurt public sentiments across the country and amounted to a seditious and anti-national statement made deliberately to destabilise the country.
High Court's Ruling
While rejecting the petition, the High Court noted: 'The Sambhal court of first instance has recorded a specific finding that there are no material particulars and circumstances provided by applicant-petitioner which would indicate that offence under section 152 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is made out. The court of first instance has further held that applicant-petitioner has not shown how the alleged speech is a threat to sovereignty, integrity and unity of country.'
The court added: 'The court of first instance has further held that the claim of applicant-petitioner that offending speech would incite instability and rebellion is based on petitioner suspicion and imagination and no material has been shown in support thereof.'
Legal Context
Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) addresses acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. The High Court's decision underscores the importance of free speech and political criticism in a democratic setup, as long as it does not cross the line into explicit threats to national security.
