New Delhi : In some strong remarks, Congress chief Sonia Gandhi on Tuesday warned Italy on the Italian naval guards issue.

Addressing the general body meeting of Congress parliamentary party — the first such interaction with her MPs after the start of the Budget session of Parliament, Sonia said that no country should take India for granted.

The two naval guards, accused of killing two Indian fishermen, are facing trial in India. The guards, who went home to cast their vote in their country’s elections, have not returned to the country despite an undertaking by the Italian ambassador Daniele Mancini in the Supreme Court.

In the wake of the DMK’s threat to pull out of the UPA on Sri Lankan Tamils problem, Sonia said the government was fully committed to the cause of Lankan Tamils and an impartial inquiry should happen into the allegations of atrocities against them. “We strongly stand for human rights of the people of Sri Lanka,” said Sonia Gandhi at the CPP meeting.

The Supreme Court on Monday had pulled up Italy’s ambassador Daniele Mancini for reneging on the undertaking given to it on the Italian naval guards row and extended its order restraining him from leaving the country, asserting he cannot claim diplomatic immunity.

“You went to Italy after giving an undertaking. We never expected and we never believed that the Italian ambassador will renege like this,” the bench observed.

As senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Mancini and Republic of Italy Rohatgi pressed on the issue of immunity after the order extending the March 14 direction was passed, a bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir reminded him again about the undertaking given by the Italian envoy.

The order barring the envoy from leaving the country was extended to April 2 when the case will again come up for hearing.

Rohatgi’s submission was taken exception to by the bench which said, “We don’t go by anything. He has given the undertaking. We are not so naive.

“We don’t accept his statement. We don’t believe his statement. He has lost trust.”

The court said, “The person who has come to this court as petitioner, we don’t think he has any immunity.”