The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that “all matters are treated equally before us” after Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for a complainant in a defamation case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, alleged that the Opposition Leader's matter was not being listed.

The reference was made to Gandhi's Special Leave Petition challenging criminal proceedings arising from his alleged remarks concerning the Indian Army and the Chinese attack in the context of the 2020 Galwan clash. The Supreme Court bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta had in August 2025 stayed the proceedings against Gandhi. The matter was last listed on April 23.

Today, Gandhi's matter was tagged along with two other matters before the bench led by the Chief Justice of India.

Bhatia urged the Court to take up the matter at an early date and sought that it be de-tagged from the other matters with which it had been listed. He alleged that Gandhi had not appeared on dates fixed by the trial court.

“The Rahul Gandhi matter should be taken up for an early hearing and de-tagged from the other matters. The case has been getting adjourned and the petitioner has not been appearing on the dates fixed. The matter was listed about five months ago as well, but could not be taken up,” Bhatia submitted.

“Rahul Gandhi is not a VVIP. Let the matter be de-tagged and heard independently,” he said.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, however, asked the complainant's side to follow the prescribed procedure and file an application seeking an early hearing.

Bhatia claimed that the matter was not getting listed by the Registry despite a specific judicial direction, and said the situation “does not augur well for the institution as well.”

The CJI responded, “All matters are treated equally. Please file an appropriate application."

Gandhi's matter has been tagged with two other criminal defamation matters related to The Wire. The counsel appearing in that matter submitted that the limited issue now concerned Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) specifically, whether an accused is required to be given an opportunity of hearing before cognizance is taken. They also claimed that the case had no connection with the 2024 Rahul Gandhi matter with which it had been tagged.

Case Details: RAHUL GANDHI v STATE OF U.P. AND ANR|Diary No. 31445-2025