LUCKNOW: In order to avoid an open court hearing while exercising utmost caution with documents attached to the case file, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday deferred the hearing on a plea seeking a probe into the alleged disproportionate assets (DA) of Congress MP and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, till May 12.
The division bench, comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Zafeer Ahmad, passed the order on a writ petition filed by Karnataka BJP worker S. Vignesh Shishir, while directing that the documents related to the case be kept in a sealed envelope.
The petitioner moved the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on April 25, 2026, and the bench took up the case for its first hearing on May 6, 2026.
Interestingly, both judges heard the matter in their chamber. After Wednesday’s hearing, they issued directions to seal the entire copy of the writ petition before them, and it was ordered to be kept in the custody of the Senior Registrar of the High Court.
The judges further directed the Senior Registrar to place the case file before the bench on May 12 at 2:15 pm for a further hearing in chambers.
“The seal shall be opened by the Bench Secretary of this Court on the next date of listing,” the judges ordered.
Significantly, prior to the commencement of the hearing, the petitioner moved an application urging the bench to direct the authorities concerned to preserve the records of the present writ petition in safe custody.
The petitioner has levelled serious allegations against the Congress leader, claiming that he has allegedly amassed substantial wealth from unknown sources. The petitioner has made the Government of India, CBI, ED, CBDT, Uttar Pradesh Police and the Director of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, New Delhi, parties to the petition, and has sought directions from the court for an inquiry into the matter.
The hearing was deferred after counsel for the central and state agencies sought time to obtain written instructions.
After the first hearing, the bench recorded in its order that the petitioner had argued at length, following which counsel for the opposite parties requested a short adjournment to obtain written instructions from their respective governments and agencies. Agreeing to this request, the bench posted the matter for the next hearing on May 12.