The Allahabad HC order came after a petition challenged a Lucknow court’s refusal to direct an FIR, with the lower court stating it lacked jurisdiction over citizenship matters.
BY PC Bureau
April 17: The Allahabad High Court on Friday directed that an inquiry be conducted into allegations that Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi holds dual citizenship.
The Lucknow Bench observed that the claims warrant investigation and asked the Uttar Pradesh government to either conduct the probe itself or refer the matter to a central agency for further examination.
The order came on a petition filed by S. Vignesh Shishir, a BJP worker from Karnataka, who challenged a January 28 ruling of a special MP/MLA court in Lucknow that had refused to direct the registration of an FIR against the Congress leader.
READ: Rahul Gandhi’s ‘16’ Puzzle: A Hint at Missing Epstein Files?
The lower court had held that it did not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate on issues related to citizenship. The petitioner, however, sought a detailed investigation and registration of an FIR under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Official Secrets Act, the Foreigners Act, and the Passport Act.
The complaint was initially filed before a special MP/MLA court in Rae Bareli. On December 17, 2025, the high court transferred the matter to Lucknow. Following the dismissal of his plea by the Lucknow court, the petitioner moved the high court, leading to the present order.
Legal experts said the High Court’s direction does not amount to a finding of guilt but merely opens the door for a preliminary inquiry into the allegations. They noted that questions related to citizenship often involve scrutiny of official records and require verification by competent authorities.
The development is likely to trigger a political debate, with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party expected to press for a thorough probe, while the Congress may term the move politically motivated. As of now, there has been no immediate response from Gandhi or the party on the court’s direction.
