Delhi Court grants time to Mallikarjun Kharge to file reply in revision against dismissal of complaint

A revision was filed in the Rouse Avenue court against the order of the trial court rejecting the complaint against Congress Chief Mallikarjun Kharge.

The Tis Hazari court had rejected a complaint alleging hate speech by Kharge in an election rally in Karnataka in April 2023.

Special Judge (MP-MLA cases) Jitendra Singh granted time to counsel for Mallikarjun Kharge to file a reply. The matter is listed for hearing on April 1.

Advocate Easha Bakshi appeared for Mallikarjun Kharge and submitted that additional time is required for filing the vakalatnama as well as the reply to the present revisionpetition, and sought an adjournment.

" In view of the submission made, the matter is adjourned. Learned Counsel for Respondent (Mallikarjun Kharge) is directed to file the reply before the next date of hearing, with an advance copy to the opposite party," Special Judge ordered on March 20.

On January 29, the Rouse Avenue court issued notice to Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge in a revision against the rejection of a complaint against him.

The revision filed by an advocate, Ravindra Gupta, through advocate Gagan Gandhi.

The court had also summoned the trial court record before the next date of hearing.

This revision petition is filed for a direction for setting aside the order of November 11, 2025, passed by the Tis Hazari court.

On November 11, 2025, the Tis Hazari Court rejected a criminal complaint against Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge. The court had declined cognisance and rejected the Complaint.

The Complainant, an RSS Member also, had alleged hate speech given by Kharge during an election rally in Naregal, Karnataka, in April 2023.

The court had said that no offence of hate speech is made out. The statement was not aimed at any community or religion.

Earlier, the court in December 2024 had refused to direct registration of an FIR against Mallika Arjun Kharge. It was alleged that Kharge also gave a defamatory statement against PM Modi.

Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Preeti Rajoria had declined the cognisance and dismissed the complaint against Mallikarjun Kharge.

"The statement is merely aimed at the political and ideological principles and not at any community defined by religion, caste, or ethnicity," JMFC Rajoria said in the order passed on November 11, 2025.

The court had also said that there was no violence incited after the said speech.

"Lastly, it is a settled position of law that mere criticism, however harsh and offensive, is not sufficient to make it punishable as 'hate speech' unless it tends to incite hatred between two groups," the court had said.

The court said that the evidence on record prima facie, does not point towards the commission of the offence of defamation under Section 500 IPC.

" It is pertinent to note that cognisance for offence under section 500 IPC for offence of defamation is also barred in the present case, since the present complaint has not been filed by the victim himself, the Prime Minister," JMFC Rajoria had said.

While rejecting the complaint, the court also took into consideration the judgement in the case titled 'Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan vs. Union of India' wherein the Supreme Court held that there must be a direct nexus between the hate speech and incitement/public disorder.

The court said, "There are no sufficient grounds for proceeding further against the proposed accused/alleged for any offence as no offence of defamation and hate speech as alleged is made out against the proposed accused."

" Therefore, cognisance is declined, and the present complaint is disposed of asdismissed," the court ordered.

In December 2024, the Court refused to give directions for the registration of an FIR against Congress Chief Mallikarjun Kharge.

Complainant Ravindra Gupta had alleged hate speech against the BJP and RSS in an election rally in Karnataka in April 2023.

The court, after hearing the submissions by Complainant's counsel and considering the Action Taken Report (ATR) by Delhi Police, refused to give directions for registration of FIR on December 9, 2024.

The Court had said that the Complainant is at liberty to lead pre-summoning evidence (PSE). In case any requirement of investigation arises at a later stage related to some disputed facts, the provision of Section 202 Cr.PC could be resorted to.

The Court had noted that the allegation is that Kharge made a speech in an election rally wherein scathing remarks were made against the BJP and RSS, further complaint is feelingaggrieved since he is a member of RSS.

The court had said that the evidence is well within the reach of the complainant, and no assistance of the police is required to gather the same.

It was alleged that the accused gave hate speech on 27.04.2023, wherein Kharge passed a scathing remark against PM Narendra Modi while addressing an election rally at Naregal, Gadag, Karnataka.

It was further stated in the complaint that later on the same day, the alleged accused in other election rallies had clarified that his statement was not against the Prime Minister but against the BJP and RSS. Being a member of RSS, the complainant is feeling defamed since he is an ardent follower and active member of RSS. (ANI)