Rouse Avenue Court Gives Sonia Gandhi Time To File Reply In Voter List Revision Case
The revision petition alleges her name appeared in the New Delhi Assembly voter list in 1980-81, despite her acquiring Indian citizenship only in 1983.
Published : January 6, 2026 at 1:49 PM IST
New Delhi: The Rouse Avenue Court gave Congress leader Sonia Gandhi more time to reply to a revision petition challenging the dismissal of a complaint about her alleged inclusion in the 1980 electoral rolls. Special Judge Vishal Gogne listed the matter for further hearing on February 7.
At the hearing held on Tuesday, January 6, senior counsel for Sonia Gandhi requested additional time to prepare a response, explaining that the relevant records date back several decades and required careful review. In response, the court deferred the matter.
Earlier, on December 9, the Sessions Court had issued notice to the senior Congress leader and the Delhi Police in the revision petition.
Revision Challenges Magistrate’s September Order
The revision has been filed by advocate Vikas Tripathi, challenging a September 11 order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate that dismissed his complaint at the threshold. The complaint sought directions to register a First Information Report (FIR) against Sonia Gandhi.
Allegations Over Electoral Roll Entry Before Citizenship
The revision petition alleges that her name was included in the voter list for the New Delhi Assembly constituency in 1980-81, even though she became an Indian citizen only in 1983. It also claims that her name was deleted from the electoral rolls in 1982 and re-entered in 1983, allegedly before the grant of citizenship, raising questions over the legality of the entries.
Forgery Claims And Legal Arguments
Arguing for the revisionist, senior counsel submitted that the Representation of the People Act permits only Indian citizens to be enrolled as voters.
He contended that the manner in which Gandhi’s name appeared in the 1980 electoral rolls pointed to serious irregularities, alleging that certain documents may have been forged or falsified, constituting a cognisable offence warranting registration of an FIR.
Election Commission Records Cited
The revisionist told the court that while the original complaint relied on media reports and photocopies, attested copies of electoral rolls obtained from the Election Commission have now been placed on record to support the allegations.
Why the Complaint Was Earlier Dismissed
While dismissing the original complaint, the Magistrate had held that it lacked legal foundation and was based on uncertified photocopies of electoral records. The court also observed that issues relating to citizenship and electoral rolls fall within the jurisdiction of the Central Government and the Election Commission of India, and cannot be adjudicated through a criminal complaint.
Trial Court Records to Be Examined
After considering the submissions, Judge Gogne issued notice to the respondents and directed that the Trial Court Record (TCR) be summoned for a complete assessment of the issues raised in the revision petition.
Also Read:
