Allahabad High Court asks CBI, ED to examine complaint alleging Rahul Gandhi has disproportionate assets

The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to verify allegations made in a complaint accusing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi of possessing disproportionate assets allegedly beyond his known sources of income. [S Vignesh Shishir v Director, Central Bureau Investigation & Ors.]

A Division Bench comprising of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Zafeer Ahmad passed the order on May 12 while hearing a criminal writ petition filed by S Vignesh Shishir, a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) worker from Karnataka.

Shishir sought an inquiry by central agencies into allegations that Rahul Gandhi and members of his family accumulated wealth disproportionate to their declared income.

During the in-chamber hearing, the counsel for the CBI informed the Court that the agency had received the petitioner’s complaint and would file its response within eight weeks. The counsel appearing for the ED similarly told the Court that the complaint had been received and that the allegations could be examined.

Recording these submissions, the Court observed,

“It is expected that if the complaint of the petitioner has been received, the allegations of the complaints may be verified as per law. It is needless to say that the CBI or ED may take appropriate steps which are permissible under the law.”

The Court clarified that the matter was still at a preliminary stage and did not express any opinion on the truthfulness of the allegations against the Indian National Congress (INC) leader.

The petitioner also sought to add more Union government departments as parties to the case, including the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), the Department of Revenue under the Finance Ministry, and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. He argued that these authorities were necessary for proper adjudication of the matter.

Accepting the request, the Court allowed the impleadment application and directed that the newly added parties be brought on record as respondents.

Notice on their behalf was accepted by the Central Government Counsel.

The Court further noted submissions made on behalf of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), which sought time to file its response regarding the allegations made in the petition.

During the hearing, the Court also questioned Shishir on whether the reliefs sought in the petition could be granted under Article 226 of the Constitution (allows High Courts to issue directions to authorities to protect legal and fundamental rights).

In response, Shishir relied on previous judgments to argue that the High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the plea.

The Court said the issue would be examined further after all parties file their replies.

The Court directed every respondent, including the newly added parties, to submit counter affidavits within eight weeks.

“We find it appropriate that all the aforesaid parties (including newly impleaded opposite parties) may file response within a period of eight weeks. By filing response in the shape of counter the progress in respect of complaint submitted by the petitioner to the aforesaid agencies may be apprised to the Court,” said the Court.

It also directed that the petition records and documents submitted by the petitioner continue to remain in sealed cover in the custody of the High Court registry until the next hearing.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 20.

S Vignesh Shishir (petitioner) appeared before the Court in person.

Advocate Anurag Kumar Singh appeared for the CBI.

Advocate Kuldeep Srivastava represented the ED.

Deputy Solicitor General of India SB Pandey along with Central Government Counsel Raj Kumar Singh and Anand Dwivedi appeared for the other central agencies.

Notably, this is the second of two cases filed by petitioner S Vignesh Shishir against Rahul Gandhi before the Allahabad High Court.

In a separate pending petition, Shishir has sought criminal action against Gandhi alleging violations of citizenship laws, claiming that the Congress leader held a British passport in addition to his Indian one.

In that case, the Court had initially ordered a first information report (FIR) to be registered against Gandhi.

However, the judge later withheld that order and recused himself from the matter after Shishir made certain posts on social media in relation to the case.

[Read Order]