The Supreme Court on Friday brought an end to a criminal case against Congress leader and Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi over remarks he allegedly made about Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar during the 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra.
A bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu quashed the proceedings after noting that the required sanction from the Uttar Pradesh government had not been obtained before the criminal case was taken forward.
The decision means the particular criminal proceedings pending in Uttar Pradesh will not continue.
What was the case against Rahul Gandhi?
The case originated from comments Gandhi made during a press interaction in Akola, Maharashtra, in November 2022, while he was participating in the Bharat Jodo Yatra.
A local lawyer, Nripendra Pandey, later approached a court in Uttar Pradesh, alleging that Gandhi’s remarks about Savarkar could promote hatred and disturb communal harmony.
The complaint sought action under Section 153-A and Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 153-A deals with promoting enmity between different groups, while Section 505 covers certain statements considered capable of causing public mischief.
Why did the case reach the Supreme Court?
The Lucknow court eventually summoned Gandhi to face the proceedings.
Gandhi challenged the summons before the Allahabad High Court, but the High Court did not grant him the relief he sought. He subsequently approached the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had already intervened in the matter in April 2025, staying the proceedings. At that time, the court also criticised Gandhi’s remarks about freedom fighters and cautioned him against making similar statements in the future.
The legal dispute therefore remained pending until Friday’s decision.
Why did the Supreme Court quash the case?
The key issue was government sanction.
For certain offences, including those under Sections 153-A and 505 of the IPC, the law requires prior approval from the appropriate government before a court can formally take cognisance of the offence.
In this case, the Supreme Court noted that the required sanction from the Uttar Pradesh government had not been granted.
Because that legal requirement had not been fulfilled, the court quashed the criminal proceedings against Gandhi.
What does this mean?
The Supreme Court’s decision was based on a legal requirement concerning sanction, rather than a finding that Gandhi’s comments were correct or incorrect.
In simple terms, the court found a fundamental procedural/legal problem with the way the prosecution had been initiated. Therefore, the case cannot continue in its present form.
What exactly had Gandhi said about Savarkar?
The controversy dates back to Gandhi’s comments during the Bharat Jodo Yatra in Maharashtra.
According to the complaint, Gandhi had made statements portraying Savarkar as someone who served the British and received a pension from them. The complainant argued that the remarks were intended to insult Savarkar and could create hatred and disharmony.
Gandhi’s comments about Savarkar have previously triggered other legal disputes as well.
Supreme Court had earlier warned Gandhi
The case gained additional attention in 2025 when the Supreme Court stayed the proceedings but strongly criticised the manner in which Gandhi had spoken about freedom fighters.
The court said Gandhi had a legal point in challenging the proceedings but also cautioned him about making what it considered irresponsible remarks concerning freedom fighters.
That earlier intervention did not finally dispose of the case. Friday’s ruling has now quashed the proceedings on the issue of the required government sanction.
This is not the same as a finding on the allegations
The important distinction is that the Supreme Court has not declared that the allegations against Gandhi were proved or disproved on their merits.
The case has been brought to an end because the necessary sanction for prosecution was absent.
The ruling is therefore primarily about the legal validity of the prosecution, rather than a final judicial assessment of the historical or political claims surrounding Savarkar.
Why the ruling matters politically
The case had remained politically sensitive because Savarkar is an important figure for the BJP and Hindutva organisations, while Gandhi has repeatedly criticised aspects of Savarkar’s political legacy.
The Supreme Court’s decision removes one criminal proceeding against Gandhi, but the wider political disagreement over Savarkar and his legacy is likely to continue.
