A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Allahabad High Court demanding a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the recent remarks made by businessman Robert Vadra, husband of Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi, concerning the Pahalgam terror attack.
The PIL has been filed by the Hindu Front For Justice, represented by its President, Advocate Ranjana Agnihotri. The plea accuses Vadra of delivering a provocative speech that allegedly created fear and unrest within the Hindu community.
Read Also: Allahabad High Court Slams Habit of Seeking Adjournments: Calls Litigants’ Role in Delays a “Menace”
According to the plea, Vadra’s comments attract Sections 152, 302, and 399 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), as they allegedly promote enmity and division. It is claimed that his statement has deeply hurt religious sentiments and may instigate communal tension.
“The Hindus are bound to take an exception to the hate speech and they apprehend that Robert Vadra is working for Ghazwa-e-Hind (Conquest of India),” the petition states.
Read Also: JEE Main Re-Exam Denied: Allahabad High Court Rejects Plea Citing Traffic Jam Delay
Referring to a PTI report, Vadra had allegedly remarked that non-Muslims were targeted in Pahalgam because terrorists believed that Muslims are being mistreated in the country. The petitioner asserts that this statement is blaming the victims of the attack and portraying Hindus as the cause of violence against themselves.
“Robert Vadra stating in his speech that Hindu People were killed because Hindus have been propagating their religion and Muslims are feeling weak… is a classic example of brainwashed victim blaming… politically motivated to divide communities and appease another,” the PIL argues.
The PIL also objects to Vadra’s reported suggestion that the state is promoting Hindutva and using it as a justification for such terror incidents. The petitioner counters this by asserting that India is a secular state, and the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion under Articles 25 to 30.
“…the state is neither preaching nor encouraging to practice religion in any manner… India is not anti-religious to oppose any religious faith,” the plea reads.
Read Also: Once Goods Are Verified in MOV-04, Revenue Can't Shift Its Stand Later: Allahabad High Court
The petitioner further criticises Vadra’s alleged remarks as being poisonous, separatist, and politically motivated. They argue that such statements aim to hurt one community while trying to appease another for political gains.
Given the sensitivity of the remarks and their potential consequences, the plea demands a writ or direction to both the Union of India and the Uttar Pradesh Government to take necessary action against Vadra.
Additionally, the PIL requests the formation of an SIT to investigate the root cause and elements behind Vadra’s statement, claiming that such speech could disrupt communal harmony.
