A Special MP/MLA Court in Varanasi on Wednesday set aside a Magistrate Court order that had dismissed a complaint seeking registration of an FIR against the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, over his alleged remarks on Lord Rama during an interaction in the United States in 2025.
Additional District and Sessions Judge Yajuvendra Vikram Singh allowed a revision petition filed by Advocate Hari Shankar Pandey and directed the concerned Magistrate to reconsider the matter afresh. The Court further ordered that the complaint be reheard in light of the legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court and the High Courts before a fresh order is passed in accordance with law.
The revisional court set aside the order dated May 27, 2025, passed in Complaint Case No. 28227 of 2025, and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for fresh adjudication.
The revision petition challenged an earlier order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate rejecting Pandey’s plea seeking registration of an FIR against Gandhi. The complaint alleged that Gandhi had repeatedly made objectionable statements regarding the incarnations and revered symbols of Sanatan Dharma and had insulted followers of the faith through such remarks. According to the complainant, these statements amounted to hate speech and attracted criminal liability.
The complaint specifically referred to remarks allegedly made by Gandhi during an interactive session in the United States in 2025, where he reportedly described Lord Rama as a mythological figure. It was contended that such statements hurt religious sentiments and were offensive to persons who profess and follow Sanatan Dharma.
The complainant further relied upon observations made by the Supreme Court in April 2025 while dealing with a separate matter concerning comments allegedly made by Gandhi against Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. The complaint asserted that despite judicial criticism in earlier proceedings, Gandhi and the Indian National Congress had continued to make statements that allegedly disparaged religious figures and symbols associated with Hinduism.
It was also argued that the alleged remarks concerning Lord Rama assumed greater significance because the Supreme Court, in its judgment in the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, had recognised the juridical status and existence of Ram Lalla for the purposes of the litigation.
On this basis, the complainant sought criminal action against Gandhi and requested that he be summoned to face prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 196, 351, 353 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), dealing with offences including promotion of enmity, criminal intimidation and related penal provisions.
After examining the challenge to the Magistrate’s order, the Special MP/MLA Court concluded that the matter required fresh consideration. Accordingly, it set aside the dismissal order and directed the Magistrate to rehear the complaint in the light of binding judicial precedents and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.
The post Varanasi court orders fresh hearing in plea seeking FIR against Rahul Gandhi over remarks on Lord Rama appeared first on India Legal.