MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
regular-article-logo Sunday, 19 April 2026

Lucknow HC modifies order on FIR against Rahul Gandhi in dual citizenship case

Responding to a petition by Karnataka BJP leader S. Vignesh Shishir, the bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi had set aside a lower court’s order in the case and paved the way for an FIR against Rahul

Piyush Srivastava Published 19.04.26, 06:30 AM
Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi File image

The Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court, which had on Friday directed the filing of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in an alleged dual citizenship case, changed its order after realising it did not conform to the established norm and a notice was supposed to be issued to the respondent before any such move.

Responding to a petition by Karnataka BJP leader S. Vignesh Shishir, the bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi had set aside a lower court’s order in the case and paved the way for an FIR against Rahul. Shishir had claimed that Rahul was a UK citizen.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, during the course of the hearing, the bench observed that it had specifically asked the petitioner as well as his counsel whether a notice was required to be issued to the opposite party.

"All of them submitted that there is no requirement of issuance of a notice to the proposed accused… while deciding an application,” the bench said.

"Thereafter, the court had dictated a judgment in the open court. However, before the judgment could be typed and signed, the court came across a judgment rendered by a full bench of this court in the case of Jagannnath Verma and others vs State of UP and others in 2014… wherein the full bench has held that an order of a magistrate rejecting an application under Section 156(3) CrPC for the registration of a case by the police and for investigation, is not an interlocutory order. Such an order is amenable to the remedy of a criminal revision under Section 397,” said the court.

“In proceedings in revision under Section 397, the prospective accused or, as the case may be, the person who is suspected of having committed the crime, is entitled to an opportunity of being heard before a decision is taken... In view of the aforesaid legal position, it appears that the application under Section 528 of BNSS should not be decided without issuing notice to the opposite party no.1 (Rahul Gandhi). The parties need to be given an opportunity to address the court on this aspect of the matter,” it added.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) allows the high court to quash FIRs found to be malicious or frivolous.

The court will next hear the matter on April 20.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT