The Karnataka High Court has extended an interim stay on further proceedings in the criminal defamation case filed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) against Rahul Gandhi. Previously, on January 17, 2025, the Court had issued an interim order staying the trial before the 42nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. In its latest ruling, the Court, led by Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, continued that stay.
The case arises from a series of full‑page advertisements published by the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) ahead of the 2023 Assembly elections. These advertisements, styled as a “Corruption Rate Card,” allegedly accused the then‑BJP government of charging up to 40% commission on government contracts, tenders, transfers and appointments. The complaint, lodged by the BJP’s State unit, contends that these advertisements were defamatory, false and malicious, injuring the party’s reputation. Among the accused are Rahul Gandhi, the KPCC, as well as other senior Congress leaders.
In arguing for quashing the case, counsel for Rahul Gandhi pointed out that the complaint lacks any material indicating that he personally authored, approved or published the contested content. It was submitted that the only action attributed to him was a retweet, and there is no evidence in the complaint or any sworn statement holding him responsible for the advertisement’s publication. The lawyer argued that in a defamation case, it is fundamental that those who actually publish defamatory content must be parties to the complaint — and here, those individuals have not been named.
The Court, while not yet ruling on the quashing petition, found merit in these objections at this preliminary stage. Given the absence of any clear allegation tying Rahul Gandhi personally to the act of publication, and the vagueness around who authorised the advertisements, the Court extended the stay on trial court proceedings. It has issued an “emergent notice” to the complainant — the State BJP — and adjourned the next hearing to February 20, allowing time for responses.
This order aligns with the Court’s approach in other similar petitions: earlier, it granted interim relief to other accused in the same case — including the state’s Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister — placing a hold on proceedings while legal and factual challenges are considered. The High Court’s decisions in these matters reflect its insistence that procedural and evidentiary safeguards be respected before criminal defamation prosecutions proceed, especially when they stem from political advertisements during election campaigns.
By extending the interim stay, the Court has paused immediate trial — offering Rahul Gandhi temporary relief from the case’s prosecution. Whether the Court will ultimately quash the complaint depends on how the State BJP responds and whether the complaint can cast material responsibility on him for the alleged defamatory publication.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.