E-Paper
Right to freedom of speech does not extend to defamatory statements against Indian Army: HC dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s plea
The complaint against Rahul Gandhi alleges that he made a defamatory statement about the Indian Army during the Bharat Jodo Yatra in 2022
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has recently held that the right to freedom of speech and expression does not extend to making defamatory statements against the Indian Army.
The high court made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi who had challenged summons by a local court in connection with a case related to his alleged remarks on the Indian Army.
A single judge bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed the order rejecting Rahul Gandhi’s petition.
“No doubt, Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression, this freedom is subject to the reasonable restrictions and it does not include the freedom to make statements which are defamatory to any person or defamatory to the Indian Army,” the high court observed in its June 2 order.
It may be pointed out that additional chief judicial magistrate Alok Verma, Lucknow court, had directed Rahul Gandhi to appear before the court on March 24, 2025, in the defamation case filed against him.
Gandhi had challenged the additional CJM’s order passed on February 11, 2025, in the high court.
Advocate Vivek Tewari had filed the complaint on behalf of Uday Shankar Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation with a rank equivalent to an Army colonel.
The complaint against Rahul Gandhi alleges that during the Bharat Jodo Yatra on December 16, 2022, he made a derogatory statement about a face-off between Indian and Chinese soldiers.
This statement, according to the complainant, Uday Shankar Srivastava, was derogatory towards the Army and hurt the sentiments of the armed forces.
“In my considered opinion, the trial court has rightly arrived at the decision to summon the applicant to face trial for the offence under Section 500 IPC after taking into consideration all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case and after satisfying himself that a prima facie case for trial of the applicant is made out,” the high court observed.
“No doubt that the alleged utterances by the appellant (Rahul Gandhi) are not in good taste. A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of restraint while making public speeches,” the high court observed.
Additional advocate general Vinod Kumar Shahi opposed Rahul Gandhi’s petition on behalf of the state government.
The case will now proceed in the lower court where Rahul Gandhi will have to appear as an accused, said Shahi.
The court’s decision has significant implications for Rahul Gandhi, as he will have to defend himself against the allegations in the local court, added Shahi.
“Irresponsible statement of Rahul Gandhi has lowered the prestige of the Indian Army,” Shahi argued in court.
.
