![\"Allahabad](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-130354175,imgsize-930719,width-400,height-225,resizemode-4\/-.jpg\" "\\"Rahul")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\nThe Allahabad high court on Saturday stayed its earlier direction ordering the registration of an FIR against Congress leader and Lok Sabha leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi<\/a> in connection with an alleged dual citizenship case.The court also stated that no decision could be taken without first hearing the accused, as news agency ANI reported.A day earlier, the Lucknow bench of the high court had directed the Uttar Pradesh<\/a> police to register an FIR against the Congress MP, citing allegations that he concealed British citizenship while incorporating a company in England in 2003.The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi had also allowed the state government to transfer the probe to any central agency. It noted that a prima facie reading of the allegations indicated cognizable offences, warranting a detailed investigation. The direction came after the Deputy Solicitor General submitted relevant documents as sought by the court.The plea was filed by Karnataka BJP<\/a> worker Vignesh Shishir, who alleged that Rahul had declared himself a UK citizen while incorporating a company, M\/S Backops Ltd, registered in August 2003. According to the petitioner, Rahul had voluntarily listed his nationality as British and provided a Director Identification ID along with addresses in London and Hampshire.While passing its earlier order, the bench had set aside a January 28, 2025 ruling by a special MP\/MLA court in Lucknow, which had declined to order an FIR. The high court observed that the lower court failed to adequately examine whether the allegations disclosed prima facie cognizable offences.During the hearing, deputy solicitor general SB Pandey presented central government records related to the citizenship issue, while state government counsel VK Singh agreed that the allegations, on the face of it, warranted investigation. The bench had concluded that the material on record suggested the need for a probe into the claims of dual citizenship.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n