The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a batch of petitions that had sought the registration of first information reports against political leaders for alleged hate speeches and an independent or Special Investigation Team probe into the 2020 northeast Delhi riots. The petitions, filed in the aftermath of the violence, also raised issues relating to the conduct of police and, in some cases, the 2019 violence at Jamia Millia Islamia during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act.

A division bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain pronounced the decision, stating that the petitions were being dismissed for the reasons recorded in the judgments. Detailed copies of the judgments were awaited at the time the order was reported.

Background of the Petitions

The 2020 northeast Delhi riots left more than fifty people dead and caused widespread damage to property and livelihoods. The violence erupted against the backdrop of protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act and related debates over the National Register of Citizens. In the months that followed, multiple petitions were filed in the High Court.

One set of petitions sought FIRs against certain Bharatiya Janata Party leaders, including Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma and Abhay Verma, alleging that their speeches had contributed to an atmosphere that facilitated the riots. Another petition, filed by a group calling itself Lawyers Voice, sought action in relation to speeches attributed to a range of opposition and other public figures, including Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, Manish Sisodia, Amanatullah Khan, Akbaruddin Owaisi, Waris Pathan and several others.

Additional petitions, including those associated with Brinda Karat and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, sought court-monitored investigations into alleged police inaction or excesses. Some pleas also asked for a broader probe into the funding and organisation of the protests or for an investigation by the National Investigation Agency. Parallel petitions concerning the December 2019 events at Jamia Millia Islamia sought an SIT inquiry into alleged police action against students and protesters.

Court’s Decision

The High Court dismissed the entire batch. By rejecting the requests for fresh FIRs focused on the alleged speeches and for the constitution of special investigative mechanisms, the bench effectively closed this particular avenue of litigation that had remained pending since 2020. The court indicated that the full reasoning would appear in the detailed judgments to be uploaded subsequently.

The decision does not erase the criminal cases already registered and investigated in connection with the riots themselves. Those cases have proceeded on separate tracks through the police and the courts. The dismissed petitions had sought additional or parallel processes specifically targeting political speeches and institutional accountability beyond the existing investigations.

Context of the 2020 Violence

The northeast Delhi riots remain one of the most serious episodes of communal violence in the national capital in recent decades. The violence occurred over several days in February 2020, resulting in loss of life, injuries and large-scale destruction. Multiple agencies conducted investigations, and numerous charge-sheets were filed against individuals accused of participating in the rioting, arson and related offences.

Allegations concerning inflammatory speeches by political figures from different parties formed part of the public and legal discourse that followed. Petitioners argued that certain statements made during the preceding protests had heightened tensions and contributed to the outbreak of violence. Counter-arguments maintained that the speeches had to be examined in their full context and that existing legal mechanisms were adequate to address any cognisable offences.

Significance of the Dismissal

By dismissing the petitions, the High Court has signalled that it did not find sufficient grounds to direct the registration of new FIRs against the named political figures or to order a fresh overarching investigation through an SIT on the terms sought. The ruling brings to a close a set of cases that had kept the question of political speech and institutional responsibility alive in the court for more than six years.

The decision is likely to be examined closely by those who had hoped for a wider accountability process and by those who maintained that the existing investigations were the appropriate forum. Because the detailed judgments were not immediately available, the precise legal reasoning—whether based on maintainability, the existence of alternative remedies, the nature of the material placed on record, or other grounds—will become clearer once the full text is released.

Related Proceedings

The same bench also disposed of the connected matters relating to the 2019 Jamia Millia Islamia violence. Those petitions had sought an independent examination of allegations that police used excessive force against students during a protest march. Their dismissal forms part of the same day’s orders and similarly ends a long-pending set of demands for a special probe.

Looking Ahead

The High Court’s orders do not prevent individuals or organisations from pursuing other legal remedies that may still be available under the ordinary criminal process, subject to limitation and other legal constraints. They do, however, remove the specific directions that the petitioners had sought from the constitutional court.

For the families of those who lost their lives or suffered injury and loss in the 2020 riots, the focus remains on the progress of the trials arising from the charge-sheets already filed. For the political system, the episode continues to illustrate the persistent difficulty of drawing clear lines between robust political speech, protest rhetoric and statements that may cross into incitement under the law.

The dismissal of these petitions marks a significant procedural closure. The fuller picture of the court’s reasoning will emerge with the detailed judgments, and any further legal steps will depend on how parties respond to those reasons once they are available. In the meantime, the 2020 northeast Delhi riots remain a sobering reference point in discussions of communal harmony, policing and the boundaries of political expression in the national capital.

Read more – carandbikejunction.com