The Supreme Court on Friday quashed a private criminal complaint pending in Uttar Pradesh against Congress MP and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi over remarks he allegedly made about Hindutva ideologue VD Savarkar.

A Bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu set aside the criminal proceedings after noting that the Uttar Pradesh government had not granted the mandatory sanction required for prosecuting Gandhi under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Gandhi had challenged the summoning order issued by the trial court, which had directed him to face proceedings for alleged offences under Sections 153A and 505 IPC. The Allahabad High Court had earlier declined to quash the proceedings, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.

During Friday's hearing, Justice Datta specifically asked whether the State government had granted sanction for prosecution. Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, confirmed that no such sanction had been granted.

Under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), prior sanction of the State Government is required before a court can take cognisance of an offence punishable under Section 153A IPC.

Counsel appearing for the complainant submitted that, in the absence of sanction, the summoning order could be set aside and the matter remitted to the Magistrate for fresh consideration. He indicated that the necessary steps could subsequently be taken if sanction was found to be required.

Justice Datta, however, made it clear that the statutory requirement had to be fulfilled before cognisance could be taken.

“If there is no sanction, that is the end of the matter,” the Judge observed.

The Bench thereafter quashed the complaint as well as the orders passed by the Magistrate.

“In the affidavit filed by the State of UP, there is no disclosure of sanction having been granted to prosecute the appellant-accused. In such view of the matter, the complaint and orders passed by the magistrate stand quashed,” the Court ordered.

Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Rahul Gandhi.

The case stemmed from remarks Gandhi allegedly made about Savarkar during a press conference. Advocate Nripendra Pandey had filed the complaint alleging that Gandhi had sought to promote hatred and enmity in society by describing Savarkar as a servant of the British and claiming that he received a pension from them.

In December 2024, the Lucknow trial court had summoned Gandhi to face the proceedings. The court had observed that distribution of pamphlets and leaflets at a press conference allegedly amounted to insulting the nation and promoting hatred and enmity in society.

Gandhi subsequently approached the Allahabad High Court, which declined to quash the proceedings and indicated that he could pursue a remedy before the Sessions Court under the revisional jurisdiction.

He then moved the Supreme Court in the matter.

The Supreme Court had earlier stayed the proceedings last year. While doing so, Justice Datta had orally criticised Gandhi's remarks concerning Savarkar and questioned whether freedom fighters should be treated in such a manner. The Court had also cautioned Gandhi against repeating such comments, observing that it could consider initiating suo motu contempt proceedings if they were repeated.

Despite those observations, the Supreme Court on Friday confined its decision to the legal issue of the mandatory sanction and quashed the criminal proceedings on that ground.

Case: Rahul Gandhi v. State of U.P. & Anr., SLP (Crl.) No. 6196/2025