The Allahabad Excessive Courtroom final week allowed the withdrawal of a writ petition alleging that the Chief of the Opposition and Congress chief Rahul Gandhi is a British nationwide.
The petition, which additionally questioned Gandhi’s proper to carry the workplace of Member of the Lok Sabha from Rae Bareli, was dismissed as withdrawn after the petitioners failed to provide a single doc to assist the allegations and claims within the plea.
A bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abhdesh Kumar Chaudhary was listening to the petition filed by Advocate Ashok Pandey and one other looking for a writ of quo warranto towards Rahul Gandhi, referred to within the petition as “Shri Rahul Gandhi @ Raul Vinci“.
The plea was based mostly on the “presumed floor” that he was not an Indian citizen however a citizen of Nice Britain.
The Courtroom famous that the petitioners had beforehand filed related writ petitions in 2015 and 2019, elevating the problem of Rahul Gandhi’s alleged lack of Indian citizenship and looking for a declaration that he was a British nationwide.
It famous that within the 2015 petition, a coordinate Bench had held that the treatment for such a grievance would lie earlier than the Central Authorities, in view of Part 9(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
The Courtroom additional recorded that, within the 2019 proceedings, a illustration on the problem had already been filed with the Central Authorities and the identical was pending consideration.
It additionally famous that the illustration of petitioner no. 2 was filed on Could 3, 2019, and was acknowledged by the Central Authorities on June 29, 2019. Throughout its pendency, the petitioners approached a number of authorities, together with the returning officer through the 2024 Common Elections.
Towards this background, the Courtroom famous that the petitioners approached the Excessive Courtroom once more, arguing that since no motion had been taken by the competent authority on their illustration, the Courtroom ought to itself determine the problem on the deserves.
The Bench, nonetheless, famous that equivalent prayers had already been made in at the very least 4 writ petitions.
The Courtroom however heard the petitioner-in-person after he insisted on inserting his case earlier than the Bench.
The principle submission was that Rahul Gandhi had integrated a UK-based firm, M/s Backops Restricted, on August 21, 2003, with Corporations Home, Registrar of Corporations of Britain.
In accordance with the petitioners, Rahul Gandhi had apparently declared himself a director and main shareholder of the corporate and a British Nationwide. On this foundation, the petitioners questioned how he might proceed to be an Indian citizen and contest elections for membership of the Lok Sabha.
Contemplating these submissions, the Courtroom noticed that though the argument appeared engaging, the petitioners did not substantiate their case with documentary proof.
“…nonetheless, when he was requested as to what was the premise of his aforesaid submission, the petitioner couldn’t present a single doc on information referring to the formation of the corporate or the information of Registrar of Corporations of Britain or any declaration to the impact that the aforesaid Shri Rahul Gandhi @ Raul Vinci has declared himself to be a British Citizen“.
The bench famous that the one doc relied upon by the petitioner-in-person was some alleged letter of affirmation issued by the College of Cambridge certifying the examine of 1 Raul Vinci, which, the Courtroom stated, doesn’t in any method show any of the allegations being contested within the current petition.
Unable to point out supporting paperwork, petitioner no. 2 sought permission to withdraw the petition. The Courtroom permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn.
Case title – Ashok Pandey And One other vs. Sri Rahul Gandhi @ Raul Vinci New Delhi And a couple of Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 646
Case Quotation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 646
