Special Judge Vishal Gogne of the Delhi court allowed a revision petition filed by advocate Vikas Tripathi, who had challenged the September 2025 order of the magistrate rejecting his complaint seeking a police investigation into the alleged electoral roll irregularity.
Also Read: Rajasthan: BJP secures 197 civic body heads, twice as many as Congress; election for the rest on
The court directed the magistrate to reconsider the matter and pass a fresh, reasoned order after hearing the parties, including the Delhi Police. The matter has been listed before the magistrate on September 29.
The court came down heavily on the manner in which the original complaint had been dealt with, describing the magistrate’s decision as “non-speaking” and holding that it suffered from a “manifest error in law”.
Also Read: Karnataka: BJP MLAs sing full Vande Mataram in Assembly, defy two-stanza order
“The impugned order suffers from a manifest error in law on account of non-compliance with Section 175(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), inter alia, not hearing the submissions of the police officer concerned and non-calling of a status report from the police station concerned,” the court ruled.
The court observed that the magistrate had failed to properly consider the two courses available under the law – directing registration of an FIR or proceeding with an inquiry under the BNSS.
“The ‘non-speaking’ nature of the order was evident as the magistrate did not consider the twin options under the law of directing the registration of an FIR or alternatively conducting proceedings under the BNSS,” the court said.
It held that instead of examining the central question of whether the complaint disclosed the commission of a cognisable offence, the magistrate had “digressed towards the issue of citizenship”.
The proceedings stem from Tripathi’s allegation that Gandhi’s name appeared in the electoral roll of the New Delhi constituency in 1980, despite her having acquired Indian citizenship only in 1983. The complaint alleged that her name was subsequently deleted from the electoral roll in 1982 and appeared again in 1983.
Tripathi had sought a police investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged inclusion, raising allegations of forgery, fabrication and fraudulent declarations.
The magistrate had rejected the complaint in September 2025, following which Tripathi approached the sessions court in revision. The higher court subsequently issued notice to Gandhi and the Delhi Police and heard arguments from the parties.
During the proceedings, Gandhi rubbished the allegations and termed the complaint misconceived, politically motivated and based on speculative assertions. Her defence also questioned the documentary foundation of the allegations and maintained that no credible material establishing forgery or fraud had been produced.
The sessions court, however, did not decide whether an FIR should ultimately be registered or whether the allegations against Gandhi were proved. Instead, it found that the earlier order had not adequately examined the legal questions arising from the complaint.
The court directed the magistrate to hear the matter afresh, consider the submissions of the police and the complainant, and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.
