Questioning Minority Rights Is Not Itself an Offence, Rules Allahabad High Court in Nageshwar Mishra v. State of U.P.
Case: Nageshwar Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another
Date of Judgment: 05 November 2026
Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Coram: Justice Vikram D. Chauhan
Proceedings: Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Court Observation
“The respondent no. 2 being an elected representative has a right to raise concerns in respect of section of society. Further, questioning the rights of minorities by elected representative by itself cannot be an offence and the said speech of respondent no. 2 will have protection of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of Constitution,”
Summary
The Allahabad High Court has refused to order the registration of an FIR against Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi over his remarks concerning the Sikh community during his September 2024 visit to the United States, holding that no cognizable offence was made out from the speech. The Court dismissed a petition challenging a Varanasi court’s order refusing to direct registration of the FIR.
The Court observed that Gandhi’s comments, questioning whether Sikhs in India were free to wear turbans and kada and visit gurdwaras, merely reflected concerns about a particular section of society and were protected by the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution. In a democratic polity, the Court said, freedom of speech and expression is a foundational safeguard enabling every person to articulate and disseminate personal views without hindrance.
Key Holdings
- An elected representative is entitled to raise concerns in respect of a section of society, and questioning the rights of minorities by an elected representative cannot by itself be an offence.
- Such a speech is protected by the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution.
- A statement that only raises concerns about a community or section of society does not disclose a cognizable offence.
- An FIR cannot be lodged merely on the basis of an apprehension that a crime may be committed.
Background
Gandhi made the remarks about religious freedom in India while addressing a Sikh audience member during an event in the United States on 9 September 2024. The applicants sought registration of an FIR under Section 173(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, who on 17 October 2025 refused to direct registration of the FIR. The applicants challenged that order before the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, and the petition has now been dismissed.
Related Articles
- Chief Minister’s Office Is Not So Fragile That a Councillor’s Speech Can Shake It, Rules Madras High Court
- Police Must Refuse Permission for Protests That Personally Target Judges, Rules Madras High Court
Judgment Link: Read the full judgment (PDF)
Disclaimer: This is a summary prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the official judgment for the authoritative text.
