Spreading hatred: UP opposes Rahul Gandhi plea before Supreme Court in Savarkar remarks case

Uttar Pradesh government has opposed Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition (LoP) Rahul Gandhi's petition in Supreme Court for quashing the summons issued to him by a Magistrate for making remarks against Hindutva idealogue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar..The government has claimed that there was a "deliberate spreading of hatred through pre-planned actions" by Gandhi and thus, his appeal before the top court must be dismissed."The Ld. Magistrate properly applied judicial mind to facts and evidence, determining a prima facie case under Section 153-A and 505 IPC," the State said in reply to the notice issued to it by top court..The summons order was issued by a Lucknow Magistrate court on December 12, 2024.The Supreme Court had in April this year stayed the summons issued to Gandhi but taken strong exception to his remarks that Savarkar was a collaborator with the British who received pension from them.A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan had then remarked that Gandhi's statements against the freedom fighter were irresponsible and that the Court will initiate suo motu action if he makes similar statements."You have a good point on law and you will get a stay. But any further statement by him will be taken up suo motu. No words on our freedom fighters. They gave us freedom and we treat the like this?," the Court had said.The Bench had also highlighted that Gandhi's grandmother and former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had written to Savarkar praising him..Earlier, Allahabad High Court on April 4 had refused to grant any relief to Gandhi. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi of the High Court had observed that Gandhi has the option to approach the sessions judge with a plea under Section 397 (review of records of lower court) of the Code of Criminal Procedure instead of moving the High Court.This led to the appeal before the High Court by Gandhi. .Gandhi is facing charges under Sections 153A (promoting enmity) and 505 (public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a complaint filed by advocate Nripendra Pandey.Pandey had initially approached an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) with an application to register a first information report (FIR) against Gandhi for his remarks on Savarkar.Pandey raised grievance over remarks made by Rahul Gandhi on November 17, 2022 during his Bharat Jodo Yatra when he referred to Savarkar as a collaborator with the British and further stated that Sarvarkar received pension from the British.Pandey claimed that these remarks were made with the intent of inciting hatred in society. The complaint by Pandey also said that Mahatma Gandhi had previously recognized Savarkar as a patriot.In June 2023, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ambrish Kumar Srivastava dismissed Pandey's complaint prompting Pandey to challenge the same before the sessions court..The sessions court then allowed the plea and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate court which then issued summons to Gandhi.In the order, the Magistrate court observed that Gandhi had said that Savarkar was a British servant who received a pension.These remarks had spread hatred and ill-will in society, the trial court observed.Therefore, the trial court found a prima facie case against Gandhi and directed him to appear before it.Subsequently, Gandhi approached the High Court challenging the summoning order which also came to be rejected leading to the present appeal before the apex court.