Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Against Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and Akhilesh Yadav Over Alleged False Statements

New Delhi, March 20: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea seeking action against politicians Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and Akhilesh Yadav for purportedly making false and misleading statements intended to tarnish the image and credibility of the country. A bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet P.S. Arora said that the wisdom of Indian voters should not be underestimated, and they are capable of distinguishing between truth and falsehood.

The petition, filed by Surjit Singh Yadav, who identified himself as a farmer and social activist, cited news reports on various media platforms accusing the politicians of disseminating misleading information regarding the alleged waiver of loans by the Central government to certain industrialists. He sought directions for the Centre to take legal action against the politicians and to compel social media platforms and their affiliated political parties to remove the purportedly false statements. Shakti Remark Row: Rahul Gandhi Accuses PM Narendra Modi of Twisting His Words, Says ‘I Spoke About Not Religious, but Power of Unrighteousness, Corruption and Falsehood’

However, the bench rejected the plea, stating that individuals or industrialists purportedly aggrieved by the statements have the means to pursue legal recourse themselves. It further said that the principle of relaxation of locus standi (legal standing) does not apply in this case, citing the voters' capacity to make informed decisions about political rhetoric. In response to the petitioner's argument that the politicians' statements had negatively impacted India's image and the government's credibility, the court reiterated its stance, stressing the electorate's ability to discern the truth. Electoral Bonds: BJP Engaged in Extortion by Misusing ED and CBI Raids, Says Samajwadi Party Chief Akhilesh Yadav

The bench asserted that it was not within the court's purview to adjudicate on matters best left to the democratic process and individual legal action. The plea contended that the dissemination of factually incorrect statements by political figures had eroded public trust in the Central government. However, the court concluded that such matters were outside its jurisdiction, closing the case.