High Court Stays Criminal Defamation Proceedings Against Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge Pending Before Punjab Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed proceedings in a criminal defamation complaint pending against Indian National Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur.

The case stems from a complaint filed by one Hitesh Bhardwaj, a resident of Sangrur, against the Congress President's comments about Bajrang Dal during the Karnataka Assembly election campaigning. Bhardwaj had allegedly filed a complaint in the Sangrur court based on the Congress election manifesto during the Karnataka Assembly elections in 2023 and the statements made at that time.

Justice Aman Chaudhary issued notice of motion and directed that "till the next date of hearing, proceedings before the trial Court shall remain stayed." The matter has been listed for 26.11.2026.

The petition was filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 482 CrPC, seeking quashing of the complaint titled Hitesh Bhardwaj v. Mallikarjun Kharge, President All India Congress Committee, Indian National Congress, along with the summoning order and all consequential proceedings.

Senior counsel for the petitioner argued that the summoning order had been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing at the pre-summoning stage, rendering it non-compliant with the proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS and void ab initio. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court's decision in Parvinder Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 903.

It was further urged that the report contemplated under Section 225 BNSS (erstwhile Section 202 CrPC) was not taken into account while passing the impugned order. Since the petitioner resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the ACJM, Sangrur, it was imperative for the trial Court to conduct an enquiry or investigation into the alleged offence before summoning him. On this, counsel relied on Mehmood Ul Rehman v. Khazir Mohammad Tunda, (2015) 12 SCC 420.

The petition also submitted that the summoning order is a non-speaking order, no reasons having been assigned for summoning the petitioner, and the ACJM having mechanically summoned him without application of mind and the complaint has been filed without locus standi.

It was further averred that the son of the original complainant could not have prosecuted the complaint in the absence of any written authorisation from the organisation alleging commission of the offence.

It was contended that the complaint is frivolous, baseless and a complete abuse of the process of law, driven by political and malicious considerations, and in the nature of publicity litigation.

 Title: Mallikarjun Kharge v. Hitesh Bhardwaj 

Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pratham Sethi, Mr. Rohan Gupta and Ms. Sandhya Gaur, Advocates for the petitioner.