Rahul Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, appeared before a special MP-MLA court in Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh, on Friday to record his statement in a 2018 criminal defamation case linked to remarks concerning Union Home Minister Amit Shah. The matter has been posted for further hearing on March 9, when the Raebareli MP is expected to produce evidence in his defence.The case stems from a speech delivered during a political rally in 2018 in which Gandhi allegedly referred to Shah in connection with corruption allegations. A local Bharatiya Janata Party functionary subsequently filed a complaint, contending that the remarks were defamatory and damaged the reputation of the senior minister. The complaint was taken cognisance of by the court under provisions of the Indian Penal Code dealing with criminal defamation.
Gandhi’s counsel, Kashi Prasad Shukla, told reporters outside the courtroom that his client had complied with the court’s directions and recorded his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows an accused to explain circumstances appearing in evidence against them. Shukla said the court had fixed March 9 for the next stage of proceedings, when the defence would have an opportunity to present its evidence.
The proceedings are being heard by a special court designated to try cases involving Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assemblies. Such courts were set up following directions from the Supreme Court aimed at expediting criminal cases against legislators and ensuring time-bound trials.
The defamation complaint relates to comments made by Gandhi during a rally in Karnataka ahead of the 2018 Assembly elections. In that speech, he reportedly referred to Shah’s past legal entanglements, including his discharge in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case, and used a phrase that the complainant argued imputed criminality. Shah had been discharged by a Mumbai court in 2014 in that case, a decision later upheld when no appeal was pursued by investigative authorities.
Gandhi has maintained that his remarks were political in nature and formed part of legitimate criticism of a rival party leader. In earlier court appearances, his legal team argued that the speech must be viewed in the broader context of electoral campaigning, where robust criticism and rhetorical flourish are commonplace. The prosecution, however, contends that the comments crossed the line from political critique into personal defamation.
The Sultanpur case unfolds against a wider backdrop of legal scrutiny surrounding statements made by Gandhi in public forums. In 2023, a Surat court convicted him in a separate criminal defamation case over remarks about the Modi surname, leading to his temporary disqualification from the Lok Sabha. The conviction was later stayed by the Supreme Court, which restored his membership pending appeal. That episode intensified debate over the use of criminal defamation provisions in political contests.
Legal experts note that criminal defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code carries a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both. While convictions are not frequent, the mere pendency of such cases can carry political and reputational consequences. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation in 2016, ruling that the right to reputation is an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Political reactions to Gandhi’s court appearance reflected familiar partisan lines. Leaders from the Congress party described the case as an attempt to stifle opposition voices through legal means. They argue that defamation complaints are increasingly deployed to deter sharp criticism of those in power. The Bharatiya Janata Party has rejected that charge, asserting that the law must take its course and that no individual is above accountability for statements made in public.
Court records indicate that the Sultanpur complaint was filed by a BJP worker who claimed to have been personally aggrieved by Gandhi’s remarks about Shah, asserting that they harmed the reputation of the party and its leaders. Under criminal defamation law, a complaint can be initiated by a person who claims to be directly affected by the alleged defamatory statement.
Friday’s hearing was conducted amid standard security arrangements outside the court complex. Gandhi arrived in Sultanpur earlier in the day and left after completing the formalities. No immediate directions on interim relief were sought, as the proceedings have progressed through evidence and statement stages over several years.