The Supreme Court barred the CBI and other authorities from submitting further reports to the Allahabad High Court and deferred the next hearing there.
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a plea filed by Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi challenging Allahabad High Court orders directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to examine allegations of disproportionate assets against him.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana also passed interim directions while the matter remains pending.
The apex court ordered that the CBI or any other authority should not submit a report to the Allahabad High Court in the meantime. It also directed the High Court to defer its next hearing until the matter is taken up again by the Supreme Court.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Gandhi, strongly challenged the High Court’s approach.
“This is unknown to law, my lord. This is absolutely unknown to law. This is a witch hunt process which is not recognised by law. This is most unfortunate, my lord. Attempts after attempt are being made by this very petitioner,” Sibal submitted.
He also questioned the locus of the original petitioner and pointed out that his credentials had not been disclosed.
The case stems from a criminal writ petition filed before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court by S Vignesh Shishir, also referred to as S Vighnesh Shishir, a BJP worker from Karnataka.
Shishir alleged that Gandhi possessed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income and sought an investigation by central agencies, including the CBI and ED.
In May 2026, a division bench of the High Court directed the CBI and ED to verify the allegations in the complaint “as per law” and inform the court about the progress.
The High Court clarified that the agencies were free to take appropriate steps permissible under law. The proceedings were conducted in chamber, with documents kept in sealed cover. Gandhi was neither impleaded nor given an opportunity to be heard at that stage.
On July 20, the High Court expressed dissatisfaction with the CBI’s affidavit on the progress of the inquiry and directed a senior officer of the agency to personally file a fresh and detailed affidavit.
The matter was treated as part-heard and listed for August 20. The High Court also observed that the ED was free to proceed in accordance with law if its inquiry revealed any misdeed or illegal act.
Gandhi approached the Supreme Court in early August, challenging these orders.
In his petition, he described the High Court directions as amounting to a “fishing” and “roving” inquiry. He contended that the proceedings violated principles of natural justice as he was neither issued notice nor given an opportunity to be heard.
Gandhi also argued that the High Court had not examined the maintainability of the petition, the locus or bona fides of the petitioner, or its own territorial jurisdiction.
He further pointed out that the same petitioner had previously filed multiple cases against him, including one concerning alleged foreign citizenship, and characterised the litigation as vexatious and motivated.
Gandhi also sought the transfer of the proceedings from the Allahabad High Court to the Supreme Court or another High Court. He argued that the manner in which the proceedings were conducted, including in-chamber hearings and the use of sealed-cover documents, undermined public confidence in the fairness of the judicial process.
Monday’s interim order prevents the investigating agencies from submitting further reports to the Allahabad High Court and puts the High Court proceedings on hold until the Supreme Court takes up Gandhi’s plea again.
The respondents, including the original petitioner and the central agencies, will now have to respond to the Supreme Court’s notice.
The Allahabad High Court’s scheduled hearing will remain deferred in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
