English
English
English
Delhi Court revives complaint over alleged pre-citizenship voter roll entry involving Sonia Gandhi. (Image: Google)
New Delhi: A Delhi Sessions Court has revived a complaint concerning the alleged inclusion of Congress leader Sonia Gandhi’s name in an electoral roll before she acquired Indian citizenship, setting aside an earlier magistrate’s decision that had declined to order an FIR.
Special Judge Vishal Gogne directed that the complaint be considered afresh by the magistrate. The court said a fresh, reasoned order should be passed after the matter is reconsidered.
The complaint filed by advocate Vikas Tripathi alleges that Sonia Gandhi’s name appeared in the electoral roll for the New Delhi constituency in 1980, even though she acquired Indian citizenship in April 1983.
According to the complainant, her name was subsequently removed from the electoral roll and later appeared again after she obtained citizenship. The complaint alleges that the earlier inclusion could indicate the use of false or forged documents. These are allegations made in the complaint and have not been established by a court.
The complaint was earlier dismissed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vaibhav Chaurasia on September 11, 2025. Tripathi subsequently challenged that decision before the Sessions Court, seeking reconsideration of the refusal to direct registration of an FIR.
The Sessions Court has now set aside the earlier order and sent the matter back for fresh consideration.
The Sessions Court found deficiencies in the magistrate’s earlier reasoning and directed the matter to be examined again. According to the latest court reporting, the Sessions Court also said the magistrate should hear the complainant and the Delhi Police before passing a fresh order.
Sonia Gandhi has contested the complaint. Her response described the allegations as misconceived and politically motivated and argued that the complaint relied on assumptions and media reports rather than foundational documents establishing the alleged forgery.
Her side has also questioned the absence of copies of the alleged voter-registration applications, citizenship-related documents or forged records relied upon by the complainant.
The latest order does not establish that voter-list forgery took place. Instead, the Sessions Court has directed the lower court to reconsider the complaint and issue a reasoned decision. The next stage will therefore focus on whether the allegations and material placed before the magistrate justify the requested police investigation.
The development puts the complaint back before the magistrate after the earlier refusal to order an FIR was set aside. The case is now expected to proceed through the fresh consideration directed by the Sessions Court, with the underlying allegations still to be examined through the legal process.
