Supreme Court Rebukes Rahul Gandhi Over Galwan Remarks, Stays Defamation Proceedings

New Delhi, August 5 — The Supreme Court of India on Monday delivered stern observations against Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, for his public remarks alleging Chinese occupation of Indian territory. While granting him interim relief in a criminal defamation case, the bench made strong oral observations questioning the veracity and appropriateness of his statements.

“If you were a true Indian, you would not say this,” Justice Dipankar Datta remarked sharply during the proceedings, referring to Gandhi's comments made in the context of the 2020 Galwan Valley clash. The court was hearing a plea seeking relief from a defamation case initiated over Gandhi’s social media posts alleging Chinese encroachment on Indian soil and criticizing the Indian Army’s handling of the situation.

A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih stayed further proceedings in the case but expressed disapproval over Gandhi’s choice of platform for making such sensitive claims. “Why do you say these things on social media? Why not raise them in Parliament?” Justice Datta asked, questioning the need to air such views outside the democratic institution meant for deliberation.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, argued that in a functioning democracy, the opposition must be free to raise concerns, especially those already in the public domain. “If he cannot raise issues already reported in the press, he cannot effectively function as Leader of the Opposition,” Singhvi said.

However, the bench countered this by questioning the basis of Gandhi’s claim regarding the alleged Chinese occupation of 2,000 square kilometres of Indian territory. “Were you present there? Do you have any credible material? Why do you make such statements without proof?” Justice Datta asked.

The court's observations came even as it agreed to examine procedural lapses in the complaint process. Singhvi contended that under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS), a court must hear the accused before proceeding with a criminal complaint—something the High Court allegedly overlooked. Justice Datta acknowledged the argument but noted that it had not been raised earlier during the High Court proceedings.

The Supreme Court issued notice in the matter and stayed the defamation case for the time being.

The defamation complaint against Rahul Gandhi stems from a February 2025 summoning order issued by a special MP-MLA court in Lucknow. The Allahabad High Court had dismissed Gandhi’s plea against the order on May 29, prompting him to seek relief from the apex court.