Mumbai, September 8, 2026: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday refused to quash proceedings initiated against Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi over alleged remarks concerning Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Justice N R Borkar dismissed Gandhi’s petition challenging the summons issued by a Girgaon magistrate, observing that there was “no infirmity” in the magistrate’s order.
“In absence of any manifest illegality or perversity in the impugned order, this is not a case for interference in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC,” the court said.
Justice Borkar continued the interim order of stay for six weeks to allow Gandhi to approach the Supreme Court.
Complaint Over 2018 Remarks
A complaint was filed in 2019 by Mahesh Hukumchand Shrishrimal, a BJP member, alleging that Gandhi made objectionable statements during a political rally in Rajasthan in September 2018. The complainant claimed that the remarks harmed the reputation of Prime Minister Modi and led to trolling and criticism on media and social media.
The Girgaon Metropolitan Magistrate issued process against Gandhi on August 28, 2019. Gandhi approached the high court after receiving the summons in July 2021, contending that the complaint was politically motivated and not legally maintainable.
Court Examines Aggrieved Person Claim
Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola, appearing for Gandhi, argued that the complainant was not an “aggrieved person” under Section 199 of the CrPC. He submitted that Gandhi had neither named the BJP nor targeted any definite or identifiable class.
The high court, however, rejected the contention at this stage, stating that the expression “some person aggrieved” does not follow a rigid formula and must be examined based on the facts of each case.
The court said a recognised political party with a defined structure, registered office-bearers and identifiable members could be considered a definite and determinate body.
The court noted Shrishrimal’s claim that he had been an active BJP member for over two decades. It said the alleged remarks against the PM could not at the threshold be held incapable of extending to party members and office-bearers.
Question To Be Decided At Trial
“Whether the imputation was confined to the person of the Hon’ble Prime Minister alone, or whether and to what extent they cast their shadow upon the members and functionaries of the party, is a matter requiring an appreciation of evidence and context,” the court said.
Also Watch:
The judge held that this question would have to be examined during trial and could not be conclusively decided while exercising the high court’s limited jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC.
Finding no illegality or perversity in the magistrate’s order, the court dismissed Gandhi’s petition.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
