The Allahabad High Court declined to consider a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's election to the Lok Sabha.

A Bench comprising Justice Ranjan Roy and Justice Om Prakash Shukla permitted the petitioner, a farmer from Karnataka, to withdraw the plea. The court also granted him the liberty to pursue remedies under the Citizenship Act, given his contention regarding Rahul Gandhi's Indian citizenship.

"The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the competent authority under Section 9(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 as far as it may be permissible in law," the Court said.

The Court clarified that it had not passed judgment on the merits of the plea.

"At this stage, petitioner appearing in person requested that it may be made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the merits of the issues. It is obvious from our order that we have not adjudicated merits of the issues," the order said.

The petitioner, S Vignesh Shishir, asserted that Rahul Gandhi is ineligible to hold the office of Member of Parliament (MP) on the grounds that he is "not a citizen of India, but a citizen of Britain."

The plea contended that Rahul Gandhi should be required to clarify the legal basis on which he serves as an MP for the Rae Bareli constituency.

To substantiate the claim of Gandhi being a foreign citizen, the petitioner referred to documents filed by a UK firm, M/s Backdops Limited, where Gandhi was listed as a director from 2003 to 2009. The plea emphasized that documents filed by this company in 2006 indicated Rahul Gandhi's nationality as British

It was also argued that Rahul Gandhi should not remain an MP because in 2023, he was convicted and sentenced to two years in jail by a Surat trial court in a defamation case.

Accordingly, the plea asserted that Rahul Gandhi is disqualified from holding the office of MP under the provisions of Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, which pertains to disqualification on conviction for certain offences.

The petitioner further argued that despite the Supreme Court granting a stay on the conviction, Rahul Gandhi should still be disqualified from holding office as an MP. The petitioner noted that the Supreme Court did not explicitly permit Gandhi to contest in the recently concluded Lok Sabha Elections.

During the hearing, the Court queried the petitioner, who appeared in-person, about his occupation, noting that his petition did not mention his credentials.

The petitioner responded that he is a farmer residing in Karnataka and also a member of a political party.

After presenting arguments for approximately 20 minutes, the petitioner requested permission to withdraw the plea. This would enable him to approach the appropriate authority mentioned under Section 9(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, to address his concerns regarding Rahul Gandhi's citizenship.