Remarks against Savarkar: SC extends stay on trial in case against Rahul Gandhi in UP
A bench comprising Justices Dipankra Datta and Augustine George Masih took note of the fact that a letter for adjournment was circulated in the case filed by Gandhi and decided to hear it after four weeks.
Senior advocate Garima Prasad, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, apprised the court that a reply to the plea has been filed by the state.
The state government has opposed the plea of Gandhi and sought its dismissal saying it agreed with 'the contention of complainant advocate Nripendra Pandey that Rahul Gandhi's actions were done with intention of spreading hate and enmity within the society.' It said the order passed by the Allahabad High Court, rejecting Gandhi's plea, was 'justified and legal' and interference from the top court was 'warranted'.
The bench also permitted complainant Pandey, who had fled the case against the Congress leader, to file his reply during the day.
It said Gandhi can file his rejoinder to the replies filed by the state government and others in two weeks.
Earlier, the top court on April 25 had pulled up Gandhi for his 'irresponsible' remarks on Savarkar, saying 'let's not mock our freedom fighters'.
The bench, however, stayed the criminal proceedings against Gandhi in the case lodged in Uttar Pradesh for his remarks. Gandhi moved the apex court challenging an order of the Allahabad High Court, which refused to quash summons issued against him in the case.
A case under various penal provisions for alleged offences like 'promoting enmity between classes' and 'public mischief' was lodged against Gandhi by Pandey, a lawyer by profession.
The case stems from the Congress leader's comments on Savarkar made on November 17, 2022, during his Bharat Jodo Yatra at a rally in Maharashtra's Akola district.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Terror and sports cannot go together': Congress on Asia Cup matches against Pakistan
The Chandigarh Congress has opposed the proposed India-Pakistan cricket matches scheduled to be held during the Asia Cup in September, urging the Union Government to withhold clearance for the fixtures. The party has argued that 'terror and sports cannot go together,' questioning the moral and strategic logic behind resuming cricket ties with Pakistan. Rajiv Sharma, chief spokesperson of the Chandigarh Congress, said that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has agreed to play against Pakistan at a neutral venue. He said the people of Chandigarh and other places in the country are upset with what he termed an 'unwarranted agreement,' particularly at a time when Operation Sindoor, launched in response to cross-border terrorism, is still ongoing. 'It is extremely disappointing that while not a single perpetrator of the Pahalgam attack has been brought to justice, the cricket boards of both nations are moving towards friendly sporting ties,' Sharma said. He warned that Indian sponsors' funds could inadvertently benefit the Pakistan Cricket Board, which, he claimed, may use the money to further terror activities against India. The Congress leader also questioned the BCCI's rationale behind opting for a neutral venue to accommodate Pakistan's interests, stating that India holds the right to host the tournament and should not compromise its position. Calling the decision an 'insult to the self-respect of the people of Chandigarh and the nation,' Sharma urged Chandigarh MP Manish Tewari to raise the issue in Parliament. He also slammed the office-bearers of the Union Territory Cricket Association for their silence on the matter, accusing them of compromising national pride for personal or political gains.
The Wire
7 minutes ago
- The Wire
Bihar SIR ‘Exercise in Exclusion', Says Opposition INDIA Bloc
Politics Addressing a press conference in New Delhi, the opposition said that the EC must abandon its 'institutional arrogance' and roll back the SIR. New Delhi: The opposition INDIA bloc on Sunday (July 27) called the Election Commission (EC)'s ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar an 'exercise in exclusion', demanding that the poll body give up its 'institutional arrogance' and stop the exercise. 'This is an exercise in exclusion. In the whole month, you could not find a single person who had to be included? There are different categories of exclusion, but it is highly surprising that they did not come across a single person who is eligible for inclusion,' said Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya while addressing a press conference in New Delhi. 'Between the summary revision which was conducted in January 2025 and July 2025 SIR, are we to believe that 22 lakh people have died in the last six months?' According to the EC's figures released on Sunday, a total of 65 lakh people have been found to be deceased, permanently shifted or not found, and another seven lakh were found to have registered in multiple places. The commission said that 7.24 crore enumeration forms have been collected at the end of its month-long exercise, which amounts to 91.69% of the total electors in the state. The press conference was addressed by Bhattacharya, Rashtriya Janata Dal MP Manoj Kumar Jha, Congress MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi and the Communist Party of India (Marxist)'s Nilotpal Basu. Singhvi questioned the 'institutional arrogance' of the EC and asked why the exercise could not be de-linked from the assembly elections due to be held in November. 'Please rethink your institutional arrogance. Everyone across the country is urging you to roll this back. What was the hurry to conduct this exercise just three months before the elections and link it to the elections? Why could this not be done after the elections? Many mistakes are being made because of this time limit,' he said. Singhvi said that amid questions being raised that the exercise was not one for the purification of electoral rolls but a citizenship verification drive, the EC has now made its stated objective clear. 'Earlier it was not clear, but now it is absolutely clear that this is a citizenship verification exercise by the EC. The Supreme Court's suggestion is as good as an order. If one is to accept the EC's argument that Aadhaar, ration card and EPIC card cannot be accepted, then that only means you want a proof of citizenship. That means your stated objective is to determine citizenship,' he said. Earlier this week, the EC in its affidavit in the Supreme Court said it has the authority to seek proof of citizenship and also turned down the court's suggestion that Aadhaar, voter identity and ration cards be considered as valid documents in its controversial exercise, which has been criticised for its risk of mass disenfranchisement and exclusion. 'Because you have said citizenship cannot be determined by ration card, voter ID card or Aadhaar card. So the question arises, has this right been given to the EC?' said Singhvi. Jha said that the exercise was started without consulting political parties, while 'opacity had become a hallmark' of the EC's functioning. 'When the chief election commissioner [Gyanesh Kumar] took over, he had said emphatically that none of his decisions would be taken without consulting political parties. I think in the last 22 years, there has been no bigger decision than this, but no political party was consulted. On June 24 the exercise was announced and on June 25 it was started," he said. Jha said that reports had shown booth-level officers filling out forms or sitting at a party office and signing forms, as well as instances of forms not being filled duly. 'This is a form of constitutional fraud. If my form can be filled without my sign or fingerprint and submitted, and on the basis of this you call it a cleaning exercise, then sorry to say, opacity has become a hallmark of the functioning of the EC,' he said. The opposition parties demanded that the exercise be stopped, with time still in hand. The Supreme Court meanwhile is slated to continue hearing the petitions challenging the exercise on Monday (July 28). The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
The Hindu
7 minutes ago
- The Hindu
A section of Congress leaders rally in support of Satheesan against Vellappally's attacks
A section of Congress leaders and members of some Muslim youth organisations appeared to rally in support of Leader of the Opposition V.D. Satheesan who faced harsh criticism from Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam (SNDP) general secretary Vellappally Natesan for the third consecutive day on Sunday. Congress leader K.C. Joseph said in a social media post that criticism of any political leader, including Mr. Satheesan, should conform to accepted standards of public decency. He took strong exception to Mr. Natesan's 'insinuation' that Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan was above criticism in the House. (Mr. Natesan had accused Mr. Satheesan of being 'arrogant' to Mr. Vijayan in the Assembly, despite the latter's age and seniority). Congress legislator Mathew Kuzhalnadan termed attacks on Mr. Satheesan an attack on Congress. Social activist and writer Muhammad Kinalur accused the Congress leadership of being hesitant in marshalling support for Mr. Satheesan and being overly cautious around Mr. Natesan. Addressing an SNDP Yogam function at Mr. Satheesan's constituency in Paravur, Ernakulam, on Sunday, Mr. Natesan seemingly rubbished the latter's claim that the United Democratic Front (UDF) would regain power in the 2026 Assembly elections with 100 seats in its kitty. Posing a dare He dared Mr. Satheesan to go into political exile if the UDF's electoral aspirations failed. Mr. Natesan offered to step down from his post if the UDF got anywhere near 98 Assembly seats in 2026. He accused Mr. Satheesan of being 'patently anti-backward class.' Sunni Yuvajana Sangham (SYS) leader Sathar Panthaloor said the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government, which was prompt in arresting a person for criticising the late V.S. Achuthanandan, was reticent in prosecuting Mr. Natesan for 'spewing caste and communal venom'. Mr. Satheesan had earlier responded to Mr. Natesan's arguably vitriolic attacks by reminding the SNDP Yogam leader that his statements went against the principles of Sree Narayana Guru's humanist and secular philosophy. Mr. Natesan countered that Mr. Satheesan need not instruct him about the social reformer's teachings.
