2020 Delhi riots: Kapil Mishra given time to reply to Delhi Police's investigation revisions
Special judge Kaveri Baweja granted time to respondents Mohd Iliyas, Kapil Mishra, and others to file a reply on the petitions.
The court has also directed Delhi police to supply a copy of the charge sheet filed in the Delhi Riots larger conspiracy to the respondents.
The court has listed the matter on May 7 for arguments, and the interim stay is to continue till the next date.
On April 9, the court issued notice on the revision petitions moved by Kapil Mishra. He has challenged the order passed by the magistrate court directing further investigation into the North Delhi riots of 2020.
The court had stayed the operation of the order passed by the trial court till the next date of hearing. The court had also called the trial court records.
Meanwhile, the sessions court has stayed the observation made by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) in relation to the investigation of the Delhi police in the larger Conspiracy case.
During the hearing, Advocate Amit Prasad appeared for the Delhi police, Senior advocate Pavan Narang, along with Advocates Neeraj and Himanshu Sethi, appeared for MLA Mohan Singh Bisht, and Advocate Manya Hashija appeared for Kapil Mishra.
The magistrate court had passed an order for further investigation on the basis of material placed by the Delhi police and the application of one Mohd. Illiyas.
Applicant Mohd Illiyas had sought a direction for registration of an FIR against Kapil Mishra and others.
Senior advocate Pramod Dubey appeared for Kapil Mishra. He argued, "Can a further investigation without having an FIR? Where is the FIR? And there is no identification of the area of the police station."
"In the absence of a FIR direction, an FIR can not be given," Senior advocate Dubey argued.
Dubey also submitted that further investigation can be ordered during the pendency of the Final Report.
"There was no Charge sheet before the MP MLA Court. There should be pendency of charge sheet. For registration of an FIR, a complaint has to be filed before the police first, only after that, an application for registration of an FIR can be filed in the court. One ATR was filed when the matter was pending in the KKD court. Three ATRs were filed by the police. My client was interrogated by Delhi Police," it stated.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad appeared for the Delhi police and raised the question of jurisdiction of the magistrate court, which passed the order under challenge.
He submitted that even this court could not pass this court as it does not have the jurisdiction to deal with an FIR which is already under consideration of a special court, and a charge sheet has been filed.
This application for registration of FIR was filed through Advocate Mehmood Pracha, who was part of the propaganda building team in 2020, and the SPP submitted it before the court. This complaint was given to all officers and even the prime minister. Emails were sent to the prime minister, the home minister, the DCP, and the Commissioner of police. It was not emailed to SHO. This email cannot be treated as the compliance with necessary requirements for registration of FIR, Prasad added.
"A Status report narrating the five incidents was filed by the police," the SPP for Delhi police said.
It was also argued that there was improvisation of the statement of the complainant. First, he said that the vehicles of Muslims and Dalits were stopped, and later on were allowed to go.
Later, the statement was changed to reflect that there was a Road block, damage to the cart of Muslims and Dalits at Kardam Puri road, SPP added.
There was no allegation of violation; the court below embellished the Complaint, the SPP submitted.
He further submitted that we informed the court that we have investigated the role of Kapil Mishra. Advocate Pracha was asked to argue, but he didn't; meanwhile, the roster was changed. We were again summoned and asked to place on record the material.
"We were directed to further investigate on the basis of material we provided in a matter which is before the special court," SPP submitted.
The court asked, "Had you ever investigated the allegations in the complaint before filing the charge sheet in the larger Conspiracy.
"Are there any other complaints alleging the road block by Kapil Mishra?" the judge questioned.
SPP submitted that there are multiple such complaints, but nothing incriminating was found.
He was asked during the recording of that statement whether he had ever visited the place of the incident. He replied that he lives in Yamuna Vihar, and a petrol pump was burnt near his colony, SPP said.
There are 751 FIRs, no FIR talks about damage of vehicles on the same date and time between 3 pm to 6 pm, it added.
It was further submitted by the SPP that he was called to assist the court in the matter of application under section 156(3) and was given direction under section 173( 8) for further investigation, it was not expected.
"I am going to face music every day due to this order," SPP added. All these cases are tried in KKD, you do not get the power to give observation on the police investigation in a case that is before the special court, he added.
He prayed that the observation of the trial court should be stayed.
First Published: 21 Apr 2025, 12:12 PM IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
5 hours ago
- The Print
Protests erupt in Chennai over SC order on removal of street dogs in Delhi-NCR
Police said the demonstrations in Delhi were organised despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), formerly Section 144 of the CrPC, which is currently in force as part of security measures ahead of Independence Day. According to officials, the protests turned unruly when police attempted to disperse the demonstrators, leading to clashes at some sites. The protests in Chennai came days after similar demonstrations in the national capital. On Friday, Delhi Police registered four FIRs in connection with protests held by dog lovers without prior permission on August 11 and 12 in the New Delhi district. Chennai: Animal lovers and rights activists staged a protest in Chennai on Sunday against the Supreme Court's order directing that all stray dogs in Delhi-NCR be moved to shelters within eight weeks. 'Those who refused to leave the protest sites despite repeated requests were detained. Legal action will be taken against all those found violating the law,' the Delhi Police said. One viral clip from the protests shows the Station House Officer of Tughlaq Road police station being manhandled by protesters, while another video shows a confrontation between a woman sub-inspector and a female demonstrator inside a bus. The protests followed the Supreme Court's August 11 order directing authorities to ensure that all localities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram and Faridabad are free of stray dogs. The court had ruled that captured animals should not be released back onto the streets. On Thursday, a three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria reserved its order on petitions seeking a stay on the directive. The bench said it would pass an interim order after hearing arguments from all sides. At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi government, said there was a 'loud vocal minority' opposing the order, while a 'silent suffering majority' supported action. 'In a democracy, there is a vocal majority and one who silently suffers. We had seen videos of people eating chicken, eggs, etc., and then claiming to be animal lovers. It was an issue to be resolved. Children were dying… Sterilisation did not stop rabies; even if you immunised them, that did not stop mutilation of children,' Mehta submitted. Citing World Health Organisation data, the Solicitor General said 37 lakh dog bites were reported in 2024, with 305 rabies deaths, most among children under 15 years of age. 'Dogs do not have to be killed… they have to be separated. Parents cannot send children out to play. Nobody is an animal hater,' he added. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing an NGO, questioned whether municipal authorities had created enough shelter homes for the dogs. 'Now dogs are picked up. But the order says once they are sterilised, do not leave them out in the community,' he argued, seeking a stay on the August 11 order. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi also opposed the directive. He said, 'Dog bites exist, but there have been zero rabies deaths in Delhi this year. Of course, bites are bad, but you cannot create a horror situation like this.' The bench observed that the core problem was the failure of local bodies to implement the Animal Birth Control Rules. Justice Nath remarked, 'Rules and laws are framed by the Parliament, but they are not followed. Local authorities are not doing what they should be doing. On the one hand, humans are suffering, and on the other hand, animal lovers are here.' In its detailed order, the court stressed that the August 11 decision was not taken on a 'momentary impulse' but after two decades of authorities failing to address a matter directly affecting public safety. A separate bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Madadev noted that the issue concerns both human welfare and animal welfare. 'This is not personal,' the bench said. (ANI) This report is auto-generated from ANI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content. Also read: How Delhi is mobilising to save its street dogs — shelters, safe houses, and watch patrols
Hans India
6 hours ago
- Hans India
Man kills wife in Delhi's Seelampur, walks into police station to confess crime
In a shocking incident, a man allegedly killed his wife in Delhi's Seelampur and later walked into the police station to confess to his crime on Sunday. The person turned up at the Seelampur Police Station and informed that he had killed his wife, Delhi Police said. Acting on the information about the confession, a police team rushed to the spot and found the body of a 24-year-old woman. Crime and Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) teams processed the scene and collected evidence. The body of the deceased was sent to GTB Hospital for post-mortem examination. A case under the relevant section of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita has been registered. The accused has been arrested, and further investigation is in progress to ascertain the motive behind the crime, said an official. The national capital had recorded several murder cases in recent months. In August, a man allegedly killed his wife and two daughters. The accused, identified as Pradeep Kumar, was arrested last week. Pradeep killed his wife, Jayshree, and daughters over a dispute. Jayshree's brother claimed that his sister's husband was a drunkard and a gambler, due to which there was a dispute between the couple. In July, a woman and her son were murdered by her husband's employee in Delhi's Lajpat Nagar. The police said that the accused committed the crime hours after he was scolded by his employer's wife, Ruchika Sewani. To avenge the insult, he killed Sewani and her son. In another incident in July, two men stabbed each other in Delhi's Tilak Nagar area. The police said that the accused Sandeep and Arif had an argument, which later took an ugly turn. Both men stabbed each other to death. In a shocking incident in April, a 20-year-old youth was shot dead in the Seelampur area of North East Delhi. According to police sources, Sameer, a resident of the Jogis' colony in Seelampur, was attacked by unknown bike-borne shooters who fled the scene immediately after firing at him.
Hindustan Times
7 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Protests in Chennai over Supreme Court order on relocating stray dogs in Delhi
Animal rights activists and dog lovers took to the streets in Chennai to stage a protest on Sunday, days after the Supreme Court ordered the stray dogs in Delhi-NCR to be moved to shelters within eight weeks. Dog lovers and activists attend a protest rally, after India's top court last week ordered authorities to relocate all stray dogs in Delhi.(REUTERS) Protests in Chennai followed similar demonstrations seen in the national capital previously. Protestors were seen holding placards that read 'Save Delhi Dogs' and 'Their Lives Matter', with pictures of stray dogs on. People taking part in the protests were also seen holding some dogs and puppies in their arms. On Saturday evening, people gathered near India Gate against the SC's order. Earlier, on Friday, Delhi Police registered four FIRs in connection with the protest held without prior permission on August 11 and 12 in New Delhi, reported ANI. According to the police, demonstrations were organised despite prohibitory orders imposed under Section 163 of BNS (formerly known as Section 144), which was in force due to the security measures ahead of Independence Day. Also read: Humane solution to street dogs: It's as simple as ABC Police officials also claimed that the protest turned unruly when police tried to disperse the demonstrators. "Those who refused to leave the protest sites despite repeated requests were detained. Legal action will be taken against all those found violating the law," the Delhi Police said. Protests have been ongoing since August 11, when the Supreme Court directed authorities to ensure that all localities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram and Faridabad are free of stray dogs. The court had ruled that captured animals should not be released back onto the streets. Following this, a three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria reserved its order on petitions seeking a stay on the directive. The bench said it would pass an interim order after hearing arguments from all sides. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing from the side of the Delhi government, said that there is a 'loud vocal minority' opposing the order, while the 'silent suffering majority' are supporting it. He said that people eat chicken and then claim to be animal lovers. He said that children were dying and sterilisation did not stop rabies, 'even if you immunised them, that did not stop mutilation of children," Mehta added further. Meanwhile, Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the NGO, questioned whether municipal authorities had created enough shelter homes for the dogs. "Now, dogs are picked up. But the order says once they are sterilised, do not leave them out in the community," he argued, seeking a stay on the August 11 order. The bench observed that the core problem was the failure of local bodies to implement the Animal Birth Control Rules. Justice Nath remarked, "Rules and laws are framed by the Parliament, but they are not followed. Local authorities are not doing what they should be doing.' In a detailed order, the court clarifies that the August 11 decision was not taken on a "momentary impulse" but after two decades of authorities failing to address a matter directly affecting public safety.
