Himachal Police register FIR against BJP MP Kangana Ranaut over her posts on the Gandhi family

Himachal Pradesh Police have registered an FIR against BJP MP Kangana Ranaut over social media posts about the Gandhi family, Shimla Superintendent of Police Gaurav Singh confirmed on Friday, November 13, 2026. The case, against the Mandi MP, was opened under sections 196, 353 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the criminal code that replaced the Indian Penal Code.

The FIR follows a complaint by Shimla resident Capt. Atul Sharma, who emailed the Director General of Police at 7:51 pm on Thursday, November 12, with copies to the CID and the Cyber Crime wing. He asked for an FIR and for a “time-bound cyber-forensic investigation”. The SP said an investigation will now follow. No arrest, notice or court step has been reported.

What the complaint says

Sharma’s complaint is about posts Ranaut put out on November 10. In its account, they came from her verified X account with an archival video of the Gandhi family and carried “highly inflammatory insinuations” about the deaths of Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. He objects to Sonia Gandhi being called a “mysterious foreign national” and to a reference to Maneka Gandhi being expelled from the family residence after Sanjay Gandhi’s death.

He argues the posts went beyond political criticism and could promote hostility between groups, spread false information amounting to public mischief and disturb public harmony. The complaint cites Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which protects free speech but allows reasonable restrictions, and the Supreme Court judgments in Lalita Kumari and Amish Devgan. It also asks the Cyber Crime wing to preserve metadata, platform records and the original video, under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

These are the complainant’s allegations. Nothing in the reports shows that police or a court has tested them.

The three sections in the FIR cover enmity between groups and acts against harmony (196), false statements causing public mischief (353) and defamation (356).

What Ranaut had said

In her November 10 posts, as reported that day, Ranaut wrote that “one mysterious foreign national enters the Gandhi family”, and that after “Indira Gandhi killed, Sanjay Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, all potential heirs to the throne killed” there was “just one and only sympathy choice for the throne: that one foreign national called Sonia Gandhi”. She spoke of “way too many coincidences” and said Sonia Gandhi headed the government for decades “until of course 2014 happened”.

She said her views came from research she did for her 2025 film Emergency, in which she directed and played Indira Gandhi. The posts opened with a reference to a viral controversy abroad, and also accused Sonia Gandhi of promoting foreign agendas.

Silence so far

No reaction from Ranaut had been reported by the time the FIR became public on Friday night, and none from the Congress, the BJP or the Gandhi family. The reports say so in terms: no response to the complaint, and no response to the FIR.

That leaves two open questions. One is whether Ranaut will challenge the FIR, which she can do by asking the Himachal Pradesh High Court to quash it. The other is whether the Congress, which has not commented, will take up the matter.

Why it matters

The case tests where criticism of a political family ends and a criminal offence begins. Ranaut is a sitting MP from Himachal Pradesh, so the FIR was registered by the police of her own state, where the Congress holds office, while the person she criticised leads the Congress in Parliament. The posts put forward a reading of the family’s history. Whether that can amount to enmity between groups under section 196 is the kind of question courts, not complainants, usually settle.

The complaint’s reliance on Lalita Kumari, the Supreme Court ruling that police must register an FIR when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, and on Amish Devgan, a ruling on hate speech, shows the line Sharma wants police to follow. Defamation under section 356 is a different matter. It is normally pursued by the person said to be defamed, and no report says Sonia Gandhi or any family member has complained.

What happens next

The Shimla police investigation is at its start. Investigators can seek the posts and platform records Sharma asked to be preserved, and may call Ranaut to record her statement. Whether they do, and how fast, will show how seriously the state treats the case. Ranaut’s own response, expected in the coming days, will shape the rest.