HC junks Rahul's plea, says free speech doesn't extend to remarks against Army
.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The single-judge bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed that the material on record made a prima facie case against Gandhi for making defamatory statement against Indian Army and hence the summoning order of lower court could not be set aside, and he would have to stand on trial.
The case stems from a complaint filed by Udai Shanker Srivastava, retired director of the Border Roads Organization (a position equivalent to a Colonel in the Indian Army), in which he alleged that on Dec 16, 2022, during his 'Bharat Jodo Yatra' in Lucknow, Gandhi made disparaging comments about a face-off between the Indian and Chinese armies in Arunachal Pradesh on Dec 9, 2022.
According to the complaint, Gandhi had said, "People will ask about Bharat Jodo Yatra, here and there, Ashok Gahlot and Sachin Pilot and whatnot. But they will not ask a single question about China capturing 2000 sq kms of Indian territory, killing 20 Indian soldiers and thrashing our soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh. But the Indian press doesn't ask a question to them about this. Isn't it true? The nation is watching all this.
Don't pretend that people don't know."
Srivastava contended that Gandhi's statement was "false and baseless" and made with "evil intention of demoralizing the Indian Army and to damage the faith of the Indian population in the Indian Army".
He highlighted that the official statement from the Indian Army on Dec 12, 2022, confirmed that "PLA troops contacted the LAC in Tawang Sector which was contested by our troops in a firm and resolute manner.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
This faceoff led to minor injuries to a few personnel from both sides."
The complainant said that Gandhi's "baseless and derogatory statement" deeply hurt him and other nationalists.
The additional chief judicial magistrate, court no. 27, Lucknow, had on Feb 11, 2025, summoned Gandhi to face trial for the offence under Section 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code.
The lower court observed that prima facie, Gandhi's statement appeared to demoralize the Indian Army and its personnel and was not made in the performance of his official duties.
Gandhi's counsel, Pranshu Agarwal, argued that the complaint was politically motivated and lacked merit. He contended that the complainant was not an "aggrieved person" under Section 199 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the alleged defamation was against the Indian Army as an institution, not Srivastava directly.
However, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, rejected these arguments in his ruling and observed: "No doubt, Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression, this freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions, and it does not include the freedom to make statements which are defamatory to any person or defamatory to the Indian Army."
The court clarified that the complainant as an "aggrieved person" could file the complaint under Section 199 of CrPC. While dismissing Gandhi's plea challenging the lower court summons, Justice Vidyarthi also noted that the trial court's decision to summon Gandhi was based on a "judicious application of mind" after considering the complaint and witness statements, and was not mechanical.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
14 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Derogatory remarks against Amit Shah: Rahul Gandhi to appear before Jharkhand court on August 6
RANCHI: Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in Parliament, Rahul Gandhi, will appear before the MP-MLA Special Court in Chaibasa on Wednesday, in a defamation case registered against him for an alleged objectionable remark against Union Home Minister Amit Shah in 2018. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi arrived in Ranchi on Monday to attend the last rites of former Jharkhand Chief Minister Shibu Soren. After paying his respects in Soren's native village, Nemra, Gandhi returned to Ranchi and will proceed to Chaibasa on Tuesday to appear before the MP-MLA Court as directed by the Jharkhand High Court on June 10. The High Court had earlier dismissed Gandhi's plea challenging a non-bailable warrant issued by the Chaibasa court, which had ordered his personal appearance by June 26. Gandhi's counsel had sought an exemption under Section 205 of the CrPC, but the court rejected the request, insisting on his physical presence. Following this, Gandhi approached the High Court, where his lawyer argued that scheduling conflicts prevented an earlier appearance. After consultations, August 6 was agreed upon as a suitable date for the hearing. The legal trouble stems from a 2018 speech during an AICC plenary session in New Delhi, where Gandhi allegedly referred to BJP leaders as "murderers" and "liars." He had stated, 'The people of this country will never accept a lying BJP leadership drunk with power… They will accept a man accused of murder as BJP President, but the same won't be tolerated in Congress.' A BJP worker, Pratap Kumar, filed a complaint in Chaibasa's Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in July 2018, prompting the court to take cognizance in February 2022. Summons were issued to Gandhi, followed by a bailable warrant after he failed to appear. With his continued absence, a non-bailable warrant was eventually issued in May 2025. The case highlights the ongoing political tensions as Gandhi faces judicial proceedings over his remarks.
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Army says no ceasefire violation along LoC
The Army on Tuesday (August 5, 2025) said there has been no ceasefire violation along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir. 'There have been some media and social media reports regarding ceasefire violation in Poonch region. It is clarified that there has been no ceasefire violation along the LoC. Please avoid spreading unverified information,' the Army said in a statement in New Delhi. Earlier, official sources in Jammu said the Pakistan Army had on Tuesday evening (August 5, 2025) indulged in 'unprovoked' firing on forward Indian posts along the LoC, prompting strong retaliation by the Indian Army. The exchange of small arms firing between the two sides continued for nearly 15 minutes in the Mankote sector but there was no immediate report of any casualties, the sources had said, adding it was the first instance of ceasefire violation since Operation Sindoor. Indian and Pakistani militaries engaged in intense clashes between May 7 and 10 after India launched missile strikes targeting terror infrastructure across the border under Operation Sindoor to avenge the Pahalgam terror attack.
Indian Express
14 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Shelve SYL plan, use Chenab water to resolve Punjab-Haryana water-sharing issue: Mann
Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Singh Mann Tuesday sought shelving of the plan to construct Satluj Yamuna Link (SYL), and urged the Centre to duly utilise the water of Chenab river to resolve long-pending water dispute between the states of Punjab and Haryana. Taking part in deliberations during a meeting called by Union Jal Shakti Minister C R Paatil over the issue of SYL canal, the CM said that during the last meeting held on July 9, the Union Government had informed them that the Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan has been suspended, which opens up a major opportunity for India to utilise water from the Chenab river, one of the western rivers earlier given to Pakistan under the treaty. He said that the Centre should now divert Chenab's water to Indian dams like Ranjit Sagar, Pong, or Bhakra. 'To carry this extra water, new canals and infrastructure would be required which would be built in Punjab state. These canals and infrastructure can be first used to meet the needs of the state and after Punjab's requirements are met, the water can be supplied to Haryana and Rajasthan through the same canal system,' he said. According to a government statement, the CM said that using Chenab water will reduce Punjab's dependence on groundwater, revive surface irrigation and support the farming community, which is the backbone of Punjab's economy besides saving groundwater of the state for future generations. Punjab, which is currently facing groundwater depletion, must be prioritised in any future strategies for the usage, diversion, or allocation of these river waters. Mann pleaded that the waters of the western rivers should be allocated to Punjab on a priority basis, adding that new storage dams upstream of existing Bhakra and Pong Dams in Himachal Pradesh should be constructed, which will enhance the storage and regulation of western river waters. Batting for shelving of the SYL canal, the CM said that Sharda Yamuna Link (YSL) for transfer of surplus Sharda water to the Yamuna river and diversion of Chenab water to Beas river through Rohtang tunnel should be done to eliminate the need for the SYL canal. The long-conceived project of Sharda-Yamuna Link should be taken up on priority and surplus water be transferred to the Yamuna river at a suitable location. The additional water so available could offset the balance water requirement of the state of Haryana from the Ravi-Beas system apart from addressing the ever-growing drinking water requirement of the capital city of Delhi and availability of the Yamuna water to the state of Rajasthan. Under the aforesaid eventuality, again the issue of construction of SYL canal could be shelved and put to rest forever. Batting for Yamuna Satluj Link (YSL) canal, he said that the MoU of May 12, 1994 of allocation of Yamuna waters between Delhi, UP, HP and Rajasthan is to be reviewed after 2025. 'Punjab should be included as partner state of Yamuna waters allocations and 60% waters of surplus Yamuna should be considered for the state while apportioning the Yamuna waters,' he said. Mann said that Haryana has enough scope to get additional waters from other sources which also needs to be accounted for. Haryana is also receiving 2.703 MAF (million acre feet) of Ghaggar river, Tangri Nadi, Markanda river, Saraswati Nadi, Chautang-Rakshi, Nai Nalah, Sahibi Nadi, Krishna Dhuan and Landoha Nalah which is unaccounted so far while deciding the allocations of water between the states. Mann reiterated that SYL canal is an 'emotive issue' and Punjab will have serious law and order issues and it will become a national problem, with Haryana and Rajasthan also bearing the brunt. The CM said that land for SYL canal is not available as of today, adding that out of 34.34 MAF water of three rivers, Punjab was allocated only 14.22 MAF, which is 40%. The remaining 60% was allocated to Haryana, Delhi, Rajasthan, even though none of these rivers actually flows through these states. Due to reduction in surface waters, pressure is being put on groundwater. Out of 153 blocks in Punjab, 115 have been declared over-exploited (75%), whereas in Haryana 61% (88 out of 143) are over-exploited. Mann said that the number of tube wells in the state has increased from 6 lakhs in 1980's to 14.76 lakh in 2018 (this includes the tube well installed only for agriculture) showing an increase of more than 200% during the last 35 years. Punjab has the highest rate of groundwater extraction (157%) in the entire nation, even higher than Rajasthan (150%), adding that Punjab ignores its own water requirement and gives about 60% water to meet the water requirements of non-riparian states in which Ravi-Beas and Sutlej Rivers do not pass. The CM said that Punjab made a major contribution of 124.26 lakh metric tonne of wheat during 2024, which is 47% of the total procured in India and also contributed 24% rice in the Central pool. Mann said that the total water requirement of Punjab is 52 MAF and water available with the state of Punjab is only 26.75 MAF (surface water from three rivers 12.46 MAF and groundwater 14.29 MAF). He said that the water of the Punjab rivers is shared among the partner states whereas the flood from these rivers caused damage only in Punjab putting the state of Punjab to a huge financial burden every year. As the benefits are shared in a certain ratio among the partner states, it is, therefore, imperative that the state of Punjab is appropriately compensated by the partner states regarding the damage and destruction caused by the floods on an annual basis. Mann said that agreements and decisions of tribunals should be reviewed in the light of changed circumstances and environmental developments, as international norms mandate a review every 25 years. Punjab seeking share of Yamuna water is similar to Haryana's share of Ravi Beas waters as Irrigation Commission Report, Government of India, 1972 held that Punjab is a riparian state. He lamented that the Centre is of the view that the Punjab Reorganisation Act-1966 is silent on Yamuna waters as these waters were not considered shareable between Punjab and Haryana whereas the Act is also silent on Ravi waters, adding that Punjab has already enacted 'Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004', terminating 1981 Agreement relating to surplus Ravi-Beas waters.
