Politically motivated: Sonia Gandhi opposes plea in Delhi court over her name in voter roll

Congress leader Sonia Gandhi has said that the plea seeking a first information report (FIR) against her for allegedly getting her name included in the electoral roll three years before she became an Indian citizen is “wholly misconceived, frivolous, politically motivated, and an abuse of the process of law.”.Gandhis was responding to the plea filed before the Rouse Avenue Court by one Vikas Tripathi seeking an FIR against her. The case came up for hearing today before Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne. After noting that Gandhi had filed a reply, in the case, judge Gogne listed the matter for arguments on February 21..Tripathi's complaint was initially dismissed on September 11, 2025, by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACMM) Vaibhav Chaurasiya. However, Tripathi then filed a revision plea before the sessions court against the order of ACMM. On December 9, 2025, the revision court issued notice to Gandhi.It is Tripathi’s case that Gandhi's name was included in the electoral roll of the New Delhi constituency in 1980, even though she became a citizen of India only in April 1983. He has further claimed that Gandhi's name was included in the electoral roll in 1980, deleted in 1982, and then included again in 1983. .In a short reply filed before the Court, the veteran Congress leader has argued that the complaint against her relies on speculative assumptions, media reports, and “imaginary applications” without producing any foundational documents as proof. "That the complainant has made serious allegations in a reckless manner based on his own imagination or opinion or unwarranted presumption," the reply stated. It contended that neither has the complainant placed on record copies of alleged applications for voter registration, citizenship-related documents or forged records nor has he shown any attempt to lawfully obtain them."In para 8 [of the complaint by Tripathi] the complainant claims that there was an outcry from the general public in 1982 resulting in her name being deleted from the electoral roll. It is intriguing how after 43 years of the so called outcry of general public/media, the complainant records a fact in a criminal complaint supposedly on his direct knowledge," Gandhi argued. She stated the allegations pertain to events from 1980–83 and are based on controversies that surfaced decades ago. Raising such claims after more than 40 years makes it impossible to produce reliable evidence and amounts to malicious prosecution, violating Article 21 of the Constitution, Gandhi said. Further, she said that questions relating to citizenship fall exclusively within the domain of the Central government, while disputes concerning electoral rolls are vested solely with the Election Commission of India (ECI).According to Gandhi's affidavit, criminal courts cannot entertain private complaints on such matters disguised as offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), as doing so would violate the doctrine of separation of powers and Article 329 of the Constitution, which bars judicial interference in the electoral process..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.