ON
← Back to feed
2020 Hathras rape: Court to hear defamation case against Rahul Gandhi on Sept 19
India🏛️ PoliticsCenter9 days ago

2020 Hathras rape: Court to hear defamation case against Rahul Gandhi on Sept 19

In connection with the 2020 Hathras rape case, a defamation lawsuit against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has been formally served, according to the complainant's lawyer. The case stems from Gandhi's alleged comments made during a visit to Boolgarhi village in December 2024, where he reportedly claimed that the accused individuals were 'roaming free' while the victim's family remained confined to their home. The complainants, three men acquitted of rape charges in the case, argue that these remarks were defamatory, despite their acquittal following a lengthy CBI investigation and trial. The court has scheduled a hearing for September 19, following the admission of a revision petition challenging an earlier dismissal of the complaint. The incident involved a Dalit girl who was allegedly gang-raped in September 2020 and later died in a Delhi hospital.

The Supreme Court of India has directed the Union government and the state of Assam to submit their responses to petitions concerning the issuance of National Register of Citizens (NRC) identity cards. This development comes amid ongoing legal challenges related to the NRC, which was finalised in August 2019. On Monday, August 10, 2026, a bench comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe requested replies from both the central authority and the state government regarding petitions filed by groups such as the Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, the All Assam Minority Students' Union (AAMSU), and the Assam Sankhyalaghu Sangram Parishad, among others. These petitions seek clarification and action on the stalled process of issuing identity cards to individuals listed in the NRC. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, highlighted that neither the Union government nor the state of Assam had responded to the notices issued by the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Manish Goswami, acting on behalf of former NRC coordinator Hitesh Dev Sarma, called for a re-verification of the NRC list, citing potential inaccuracies within it. The petitioners pointed out that the appeal process for those excluded from the NRC had not even begun, leaving many individuals in limbo. The NRC, which contains over 3.11 crore names, has not yet issued national identity cards to all its members, while approximately 19 lakh individuals were excluded from the register. According to the petition, the entire process, involving substantial judicial effort and financial investment exceeding ₹1,600 crore, has effectively come to a halt. The follow-up actions, issuing National Identity Cards to those included under Section 14A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, and initiating the appeal process for the excluded individuals as outlined in Clause 8 of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003, have not been implemented. Petitioners argue that the delay has caused significant hardship to those included in the NRC, who face uncertainty and arbitrary treatment due to the lack of formal documentation. They emphasized that the issue of citizenship is deeply rooted in Assam's socio-political landscape, tracing back to the Assam Movement (1979–1985), the Assam Accord, and the subsequent inclusion of Section 6A in 1985. The publication of the NRC was viewed as a pivotal step towards resolving long-standing questions about citizenship and migration in the region. The Supreme Court's intervention underscores the complexity surrounding the NRC and highlights the need for clarity and resolution. With the Union government and the state of Assam now required to provide their perspectives, the legal battle continues to unfold, reflecting broader concerns about governance, citizenship rights, and administrative efficiency in one of India's most politically sensitive regions.

Go to the primary sources (2)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.

2 reports

Scroll.in logoScroll.inIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 809 days ago
SC quashes defamation complaint against Rahul Gandhi for remarks about VD Savarkar

The Supreme Court of India dismissed a criminal defamation complaint against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for remarks he made about VD Savarkar, a prominent Hindutva figure, during his Bharat Jodo Yatra in November 2022. The court ruled that the complaint could not proceed due to the absence of formal sanction from the Uttar Pradesh government, as required under legal procedures. The case had gone through multiple stages, including dismissal by a magistrate and subsequent appeals, before reaching the Supreme Court. While the court quashed the complaint, it criticized Gandhi for making 'irresponsible' comments about Savarkar and warned him against repeating such statements. Additionally, Gandhi faces another defamation case in Maharashtra related to similar remarks made during an event in London in 2023.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal proceedings and court decisions neutrally, citing both the Supreme Court's ruling and the criticisms leveled at Rahul Gandhi. It does not exhibit overtly biased language or selective sourcing, maintaining a balanced perspective on the legal and political implications.

Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the Supreme Court's decision to quash the criminal complaint against Rahul Gandhi, citing the absence of prosecution sanction. It provides details about the complaint filed by Nripendra Pandey, the procedural steps taken by lower courts, and the Supreme Court's prior w

Why objectivity (80): The article presents the facts in a neutral manner, reporting both the legal outcome and the court's criticism of Gandhi's remarks. It avoids taking sides and maintains a balanced tone, although it does include some emotionally charged language such as 'irresponsible' when describing Gandhi's commen

Hindustan Times logoHindustan TimesIndependentCenterFactual 78Objective 6512 days ago
2020 Hathras rape: Court to hear defamation case against Rahul Gandhi on Sept 19

In connection with the 2020 Hathras rape case, a defamation lawsuit against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has been formally served, according to the complainant's lawyer. The case stems from Gandhi's alleged comments made during a visit to Boolgarhi village in December 2024, where he reportedly claimed that the accused individuals were 'roaming free' while the victim's family remained confined to their home. The complainants, three men acquitted of rape charges in the case, argue that these remarks were defamatory, despite their acquittal following a lengthy CBI investigation and trial. The court has scheduled a hearing for September 19, following the admission of a revision petition challenging an earlier dismissal of the complaint. The incident involved a Dalit girl who was allegedly gang-raped in September 2020 and later died in a Delhi hospital.

Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information regarding a legal proceeding involving a prominent political figure and does not exhibit overtly biased language or selective sourcing. It reports on the legal actions taken by the complainants and provides context about the case without apparent ideological傾

Why factuality (78): The article reports on the legal proceedings related to a defamation case against Rahul Gandhi concerning his comments on the 2020 Hathras rape case. It provides details about the court process, including dates and names of officials involved. The information aligns with the cross-source consensus r

Why objectivity (65): The article presents the legal proceedings but uses emotionally charged language such as 'allegedly' when describing Gandhi's remarks. There is a clear focus on the defamation case and the implications of Gandhi's comments, which suggests a potential bias towards the legal action being taken.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories