Court rules that BJP's complaint lacked proper authorization and failed to meet procedural requirements.
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has set aside defamation proceedings against Rahul Gandhi, the former Vice President of the Indian National Congress, in a case filed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) alleging defamatory content in an advertisement. The judgment was delivered by Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav on February 17, 2026, in the context of a criminal petition filed by Gandhi seeking the quashing of the proceedings.
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by the BJP, represented by its Karnataka State Secretary, alleging that an advertisement published on May 5, 2023, contained reckless imputations against the BJP and tarnished its image. The advertisement was reportedly shared by Rahul Gandhi on his Twitter account, which the BJP claimed further defamed the party.
The High Court, in its detailed judgment, highlighted several procedural lapses and deficiencies in the complaint. One of the primary issues was the lack of proper authorization for filing the complaint. The court noted that the complaint should have been filed by a duly authorized representative of the BJP at the national level, rather than by the state unit's representative. This lack of proper authorization rendered the proceedings void.
Furthermore, the court pointed out that the tweet referred to in the complaint was not marked as evidence and was not supported by a Section 65B certificate as required under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The absence of this crucial evidence at the time of issuing the process led to a legal defect in the proceedings against Gandhi.
The court also emphasized that the imputation must be made with requisite mens rea to establish defamation, which was not evident in this case. The mere presence of Gandhi's photograph in the advertisement did not establish his intent to defame the BJP.
Additionally, the court found that there was no enquiry under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which is mandated when the accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court. This failure prejudiced the accused and rendered the process defective.
In light of these findings, the High Court concluded that the continuation of the proceedings against Rahul Gandhi would amount to an abuse of the legal process and therefore set aside the proceedings in the defamation case.
The judgment reiterates the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and the need for proper authorization in defamation cases, especially when political parties are involved.
Bottom Line:
Defamation proceedings under Sections 499 and 500 IPC - Complaint must be filed by "some person aggrieved" as per Section 199 Cr.P.C. - Filing of the complaint by an incompetent representative renders the proceedings void.
Statutory provision(s):
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 499 and 500
- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 199, Section 202
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Section 65B
Rahul Gandhi v. Bharatiya Janata Party, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2854365
