Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has received temporary relief from the Supreme Court in a disproportionate assets matter. The court issued notice on Gandhi’s petition. Moreover, judges directed him to provide its copy to complainant Vignesh Shishir. The Supreme Court also asked Allahabad High Court to postpone its scheduled August 20 hearing. Additionally, CBI and other investigating agencies cannot submit reports before that court for now.
Rahul Gandhi Challenges High Court Investigation Order
The Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court ordered CBI and ED investigations into the matter. Gandhi approached the Supreme Court against this direction. The High Court issued its order following BJP worker Vignesh Shishir’s petition. His plea claimed Gandhi had spent Rs 60 crore on foreign trips. According to Shishir, that expenditure significantly exceeded Gandhi’s declared income.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal represented Gandhi before a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant. Sibal criticised the procedure followed by the High Court. He said he had never witnessed such a process earlier. Furthermore, Sibal argued that Shishir had no connection with this matter. Yet, judges heard his petition inside a closed chamber. Sibal also claimed information submitted through sealed covers reached media outlets.
Kapil Sibal Questions Petitioner and Hearing Process
Sibal further questioned Shishir’s background and alleged RSS links. He argued that Shishir repeatedly files different petitions targeting Gandhi. According to Sibal, authorities failed to follow principles of natural justice. He also said the court issued one-sided directions without hearing Gandhi’s position.
Shishir joined proceedings through video conferencing and strongly opposed Gandhi’s petition. He argued that preliminary complaint scrutiny provides no hearing right for a proposed accused. Additionally, Shishir requested a copy of Gandhi’s plea so he could respond. The judges agreed with that request.
Supreme Court Questions CBI Over Serious Allegations
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju appeared for CBI and explained the agency’s position. He said CBI only conducts a preliminary inquiry currently. According to Raju, officials can decide about registering a case after completing that exercise. He added that investigators cannot yet determine whether allegations carry truth. Therefore, Raju argued against stopping the preliminary inquiry at this stage.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi then questioned CBI’s stand during the hearing. He asked why the agency never acted independently despite allegedly serious accusations. Bagchi said circumstances would differ if CBI had initiated action itself. However, Gandhi challenged the High Court’s order before the Supreme Court. Therefore, the bench must examine that order.
