PRAYAGRAJ, Sept. 27 -- The Allahabad high court on Friday dismissed Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi's plea against an order of the Varanasi MP/MLA court over the Congress leader's remarks in the United States in relation to the Sikh community. The Varanasi MP/MLA court had directed the court of the additional chief judicial magistrate to hear afresh an application seeking the registration of an FIR against Rahul Gandhi for his purported statement on Sikhs made during a visit to the United States last year. The order was passed by Justice Sameer Jain, who had heard a criminal revision filed by the Congress MP. One Nageshwar Mishra of Varanasi had filed an application before the court of additional chief judicial magistrate (MP-MLA), Varanasi. The court on November 28, 2024 rejected the application for FIR against Gandhi and said purported speech was given in US, so it was beyond its jurisdiction. The order was challenged before the special MP/MLA sessions court which allowed the revision and remanded the matter to ACJM court to hear it afresh. The complainant said in September 2024, during a programme in the US, Rahul Gandhi said that the environment in India was not good for Sikhs. Mishra claimed there were protests against his statement calling it provocative and divisive in the society and sought the registration of an FIR against the purported statement in Sarnath police station of Varanasi. He moved the magisterial court after failing to get it registered. The CJM (II) dismissed his application on November 28, 2024. After this, Nageshwar Mishra filed a revision petition in the sessions court, which was accepted by the court of the special judge (MP/MLA) on July 21, 2025. The present revision petition was filed by Rahul Gandhi against the decision of the additional session judge by saying that the order of the Varanasi court was wrong, illegal and without jurisdiction. Appearing on behalf of Rahul Gandhi, senior advocate GS Chaturvedi had submitted that in the application moved by applicant/respondent, there is no mention on which date statement was made. He further submitted that unless and until the entire statement is quoted in the application, it cannot be said in which context the same thing was said. He further submitted that both the courts have not considered that any prima facie case is made out or not. On other hand, additional advocate general Manish Goyal submitted that regarding the question whether prima facie case is made out or not, the core issue arose that whether the high court has to examine this or it has to be decided by the magistrate concerned. htc...