Supreme Court quashes hate speech case against Rahul Gandhi over Savarkar remarks after U.P. govt. refuses sanction

The Supreme Courtroom on Friday (August 14, 2026) quashed a hate speech case in opposition to Chief of Opposition (LOP) in Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, over his alleged remarks about Hindutva ideologue V.D. Savarkar after the Uttar Pradesh authorities did not grant sanction for his prosecution.

The non-public grievance was filed by a Lucknow resident Nripendra Pandey in opposition to Mr. Gandhi, accusing the latter of creating derogatory feedback in opposition to the Hindutva ideologue in the course of the Congress chief’s ‘Bharat Jodo Yatra’ in Maharashtra in 2022.

“Have you ever given the sanction?” Justice Dipankar Datta, heading a Division Bench, requested Further Solicitor Normal Ok.M. Nataraj, showing for the Uttar Pradesh authorities. Mr. Nataraj mentioned the State had not executed so.

“Sanction is required. However there is no such thing as a sanction. If there is no such thing as a sanction, there is no such thing as a case. It’s a must to comply with the legislation,” mentioned Justice Datta addressing each the State authorities and the complainant.

The Bench proceeded to go the order quashing each Mr. Pandey’s grievance and the summons issued by the Lucknow Justice of the Peace.

Part 196 of the Code of Prison Process requires prior authorities sanction earlier than a courtroom can take cognisance of delicate circumstances involving offences in opposition to the state, together with selling disharmony, hate, or insulting spiritual beliefs.

In July final yr, the apex courtroom had stayed the Justice of the Peace’s summons in opposition to Mr. Gandhi, represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi and advocate Prasanna S. On the time, the courtroom had issued a stern warning to Mr. Gandhi to not take pleasure in making such “statements in opposition to our freedom fighters who gave us freedom”.

Justice Datta had even cautioned the Chief of Opposition that the apex courtroom would take suo motu cognisance if he made such feedback in future, after which there could be no query of sanction earlier than initiating proceedings in opposition to him.

“This isn’t the way in which to deal with our freedom fighters. They’ve given us freedom,” Justice Datta had mentioned.

The Choose had requested what had prompted Mr. Gandhi to make these statements in Maharashtra the place Savarkar was “worshipped as God”.

Referring to Mr. Gandhi’s remarks that Savarkar had addressed himself as “most obedient servant” in a communication to the British authorities, Justice Datta had requested Mr. Singhvi, “Does your consumer know that even Mahatma Gandhi used ‘your devoted servant’ whereas addressing the Viceroy? Does he know that his grandmother, whereas she was Prime Minister, despatched a letter to someone praising this gentleman, the liberty fighter?”

In his petition, Mr. Gandhi had submitted that freedom of expression was important for a dignified life and assured below Article 19(1)(a) of the Structure.

The Congress chief had argued that the proceedings in opposition to him had been “clearly frivolous, vexatious and designed to inflict the felony course of as a digital punishment to and deterrent for the free train of his freedoms and from freely performing his responsibility as a accountable Opposition chief on the nationwide degree”.

The trial courtroom, whereas summoning Mr. Gandhi, had noticed that he had unfold hatred and ill-will in society by means of his speech through which he had mentioned that Savarkar was a servant of the British and that he took a pension from the British. Mr. Gandhi had been accused of offences below Part 153A (selling enmity) and 505 (public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).