Bombay High Court Reserves Verdict On Rahul Gandhi's Plea To Quash Defamation Case Over 'Chowkidar Chor' Comment

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday reserved orders on a petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi seeking quashing of a criminal defamation complaint over his alleged remarks describing Prime Minister Narendra Modi as “Choro Ke Sardar” and “Commander-in-Thief”. Justice N. R. Borkar, after hearing detailed submissions from all sides, directed that the matter be reserved for judgment and ordered that the interim relief earlier granted to Gandhi would continue.

The complaint was instituted by Mahesh Shrishrimal, a worker of the Bharatiya Janata Party, before a Metropolitan Magistrate, who had issued summons to Gandhi. The complainant contended that the remarks were aimed at the Prime Minister and, by extension, the ruling party and its members, thereby lowering their reputation. According to him, referring to Modi as “Choro Ke Sardar” effectively portrayed all BJP members as “thieves”, giving party workers the right to initiate defamation proceedings.

Challenging the summons and the continuation of the proceedings, Gandhi approached the High Court arguing that the complaint was not maintainable. Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola, appearing on his behalf, submitted that Gandhi had not named the BJP or any political party in the tweet and that no “identifiable or definite class” had been targeted. In the absence of a clearly aggrieved person or group, Pasbola argued, the complainant lacked locus standi to prosecute the case. He emphasized that merely drawing an interpretation that the statement applied to party workers cannot sustain a criminal defamation action.

Opposing the plea, Maharashtra Advocate General Milind Sathe argued that the Court must examine whether the ingredients of defamation are made out and whether the remarks concerned a definite and identifiable group. He submitted that the law permits “some aggrieved person” to initiate prosecution if such a group can be established, and therefore the proceedings should not be quashed at the threshold.

The principal issue before the Court, thus, is whether the impugned remarks amount to criminal defamation and whether a political party worker can maintain a complaint when neither the party nor its members are expressly named.

The Court has now reserved its verdict on Gandhi's plea while continuing interim protection.