Rahul Gandhi citizenship case: Allahabad HC criticises Deputy Solicitor General, petitioner for poor legal assistance

The Allahabad High Court on Monday censured Deputy Solicitor General (DSG) SB Pandey for extending poor legal assistance during the hearing of a petition seeking criminal proceedings against Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi for allegedly holding a passport of the United Kingdom.

Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, who today recused himself from the matter due to certain social media posts of the petitioner, expressed his anguish over the lack of proper assistance in the matter.

The Court explained that it was misled about the legal position as everyone including the petitioner had argued that the it was not required to issue any notice to the proposed accused before such order for FIR registration.

The Court noted that a full bench of the High Court has held that in revision proceedings against an order rejecting an application for FIR, the proposed accused is entitled to an opportunity of hearing.

It, thus, criticised the petitioner as well the counsel appearing for the Union government for arguing otherwise.

"I am pained to note that the learned counsel appearing in this case have failed to perform their duty of providing assistance to the Court in a fair manner as per the level expected by the Hon'ble Supreme Court," the judge said.

The Court rejected DSG Pandey's submission that since Union of India is only a formal party in this matter, he was not required to advance any submissions and cannot be faulted for not providing incorrect assistance.

The Bench said that it can request assistance on a question of law from any of the counsel, who being officers of the Court, should provide the requisite assistance.

The Court also underscored that the Deputy Solicitor General is a designated Senior Advocate and it can certainly request for assistance on a question of law.

"Moreover, when the Court had asked the question during hearing, the learned Deputy Solicitor General had not declined to answer the question on the ground that he was not representing a contesting party. He had given a categorical answer that there was no requirement to issue notice to the proposed accused," the Bench said.

The Bench said that though it is the Court's duty to render justice by passing appropriate orders, the Court is also entitled to receive assistance from the counsel in discharge of this duty.

"Lack of proper assistance creates hurdle in expeditious dispensation of justice. In the present case, although correct legal position was not placed before the court and the court had pronounced an order but the court itself found out the relevant law laid down by a Full Bench of this court in the case of Jagannath Verma (supra) and deemed it appropriate to give an opportunity of hearing to the parties on this point, thereby preventing an erroneous order to be passed," it said.

It went on to criticise petitioner S Vigesh Shishir for blaming the Court for not uploading the order which was dictated in open court last week

"Instead of admitting the mistake in placing the correct position before the Court the petitioner has blamed the court for not uploading the order that was dictated in open court and has created an unpleasant situation leading this court to recuse from hearing of the case," the order stated.

The Court had on April 17 found a prima facie case against Gandhi and dictated a judgment in open court granting liberty to the State to refer the case to the Central government for its investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

However, the Court later opined that it might have to hear Gandhi first before passing such a direction. Hence, the judge withheld the earlier order passed by him.

Following the Court's decision to not proceed with the direction for FIR against Gandhi, Shishir in a post on X had demanded that the order dictated in open court be made public.

"In this extra ordinary circumstances which has occured in last 24 hours. I would like to Request All The People of India to kindly urge the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India to kindly Direct the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench to kindly type and upload the Judgement which is dictated and pronounced in Open Court as matter pertains to National Security of India and Concerning Larger Public Interest of Every Indian Citizen about a Foreign National sitting in Lok Sabha Since Last 22 years," Shishir wrote.

Today, Justice Vidyarthi took exception to the tweets posted by Shishir and recused from the matter.

Shishir, who is from Karnataka, in his plea has sought registration of a criminal case against Gandhi under various provisions of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Official Secrets Act, Passport Act and the Foreigners Act.

His claim is that Gandhi was the Director of the UK-based company Backops Ltd and in its records, he had declared his nationality as British. 

After the police failed to register a case on the complaint, Shishir had moved the trial court. However, after the trial court rejected his plea, he moved the High Court.

The complainant had earlier asked the Ministry of Home Affairs to cancel Gandhi's Indian citizenship on the ground that he has already acquired the British citizenship.  

In August 2025, the High Court directed the Union government to provide personal security officer (PSO) of Central Armed Police Forces to Shishir for his round-the-clock security.

[Read Order]