A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant made the observation on Wednesday after senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for complainant Uday Shankar Srivastava, sought an early hearing and asked that Gandhi’s petition be separated from other matters with which it had been tagged.
“All matters are treated equally. Please file an appropriate application,” the bench told Bhatia. The court indicated that the complainant could move a formal application seeking an early hearing, rather than raise the issue through an oral mention.
Bhatia argued that Gandhi should not receive treatment different from other litigants because of his public position. He told the court that the matter had not been taken up for months and pressed for it to be listed independently. The bench rejected any suggestion of preferential handling and directed the complainant to follow the prescribed procedure.
The proceedings concern Gandhi’s petition challenging the Allahabad High Court’s May 29, 2025 order refusing to interfere with a Lucknow trial court summons in the defamation complaint. Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, moved the Supreme Court after the high court held that the magistrate had applied its mind to the material before it and had found a prima facie case requiring trial.
The complaint was filed by Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation, over remarks Gandhi allegedly made on December 16, 2022 during the Bharat Jodo Yatra. The comments were made against the backdrop of tensions with China and a clash between troops near Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh earlier that month.
Srivastava alleged that Gandhi’s statements, including remarks suggesting that China had taken territory and that soldiers were being beaten, were defamatory to the Indian Army and those associated with it. Gandhi has contested the proceedings and questioned whether the complainant had the legal standing to initiate the case.
A Lucknow court summoned Gandhi on February 11, 2025 to face proceedings for criminal defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow bench subsequently dismissed his challenge, finding no illegality in the summoning order and saying the trial court had considered the complaint, the complainant’s statement and witness testimony before forming its view.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, who delivered the high court ruling, also held that the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression was subject to reasonable restrictions and did not extend to defamatory statements. The court said the merits of the rival claims would have to be examined at trial after the parties had the opportunity to present evidence.
The Supreme Court took up Gandhi’s challenge in August 2025 and stayed the criminal defamation proceedings while issuing notice on his petition. During that hearing, a bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta questioned the basis for some of Gandhi’s assertions concerning territory held by China and asked whether he had credible material to support them.
Gandhi’s counsel had argued that a political leader raising issues of national concern should not be exposed to criminal prosecution merely for expressing criticism and that the complaint did not satisfy the legal requirements for defamation. The complainant has maintained that the statements crossed the line from political criticism into allegations that lowered the reputation of the armed forces.
The matter was later listed with other cases and, according to submissions made on Wednesday, had not been heard on merits for several months. Bhatia asked the Chief Justice’s bench to direct a separate listing, stressing that the stay granted to Gandhi meant the underlying criminal proceedings could not move forward.
