Allahabad HC dismisses plea challenging Rahul Gandhi’s citizenship.

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) recently allowed the withdrawal of a petition challenging Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s right to hold the Lok Sabha seat from Raebareli on the allegation that he is a British citizen. Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn after the petitioner failed to produce documents supporting the claim.

A division bench of Justices Shekhar B Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary passed the order on August 31 in a petition filed by Ashok Pandey and Rajneesh Kumar Singh. The petition sought a writ of quo warranto against Gandhi, described in the petition as “Rahul Gandhi @ Raul Vinci”, on the “presumed ground” that he was not an Indian citizen but a citizen of Great Britain.

What did the petitioners allege about Rahul Gandhi’s citizenship?

The petitioners relied on an allegation concerning a UK-based company, M/s Backops Limited, which they said was incorporated at the Companies House, Registrar of Companies of Britain, on August 21, 2003.

According to their submission, Gandhi had been shown as a director and major shareholder of the company and had declared himself to be a British national. The petitioners argued that if he was a British national, he could not continue as an Indian citizen or contest an election for the Lok Sabha.

However, when the bench asked the petitioner to substantiate the allegation, he could not produce any document relating to the formation of the company, records of the British Registrar of Companies, or any declaration showing that Gandhi had declared himself a British citizen.

Court observed that the argument initially appeared “very attractive” and had “far reaching consequences”, but said the petitioner could not show “a single document” supporting its factual basis.

The only document relied upon by the petitioner was an alleged letter issued by the University of Cambridge concerning the studies of a person named “Raul Vinci”. Court said the document did not prove any of the allegations raised in the petition.

Earlier petitions on Rahul Gandhi’s citizenship

The bench noted that the present petitioners had previously raised the issue of Gandhi’s alleged loss of Indian citizenship in petitions filed in 2015 and 2019.

In the 2015 petition, a coordinate bench had dismissed the plea and held that the remedy for such a grievance lay before the Central Government under Section 9(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. 

In the 2019 proceedings, court recorded that a representation dated December 15, 2015, was already pending before the Central Government and gave the petitioner liberty to file a fresh representation. A representation was subsequently filed on May 3, 2019, and its receipt was acknowledged by the Central Government on June 29, 2019.

Court also noted that the petitioners approached several authorities during the 2024 general elections, including the returning officer. A subsequent PIL seeking similar relief was withdrawn with liberty to approach the competent authority under Section 9(2) of the Citizenship Act.

Another PIL sought a quo warranto on a different ground, relating to Gandhi’s conviction in a defamation case in Gujarat. That petition was dismissed after the court was informed that the conviction had been stayed by the Supreme Court.

What did the court say before allowing withdrawal?

The bench said it was “skeptical” about entertaining the latest petition because, according to it, identical prayers had been made by the petitioners in at least four writ petitions and the citizenship issue was still pending before the Central Government.

Court nevertheless gave the petitioner, who appeared in person, an opportunity to present his case.

After being unable to produce documents supporting the allegations, petitioner No. 2 sought permission to withdraw the petition. The bench allowed the request. It also directed that there would be no order as to costs.

Case Title: Ashok Pandey And Another vs. Sri Rahul Gandhi @ Raul Vinci New Delhi And 2 Others

Order Date: August 31, 2026

Bench: Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary

Tags: