|  |  | 

India Top Headlines

Delhi HC postponement of unjustified hate speech case: Supreme Court | India News


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Delhi High Court to expedite the hearing on PILs seeking the FIR registration against BJP, Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma officials, for making allegedly inflammatory speeches, including ” desh ke gaddaron ko … “slogans, which according to the petitioners became viral and caused disturbances in Delhi.

Transfer a petition filed by disturbance victims led by Shaikh Mujtaba Farooq, based in Aurangabad, to listen to the HC of Delhi, with a request to hear it on Friday along with pending requests postponed until April 13, a bank of CJI SA Bobde and Justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant said: “We believe that the postponement for a long period was unjustified. But, at the same time, adhering to judicial discipline, we will not assume jurisdiction over the matter when the HC is already dealing with it. ” He said: “Delhi HC is requested to eliminate matters as quickly as possible on its own merits and in accordance with the law. The HC can also explore the possibility of a peaceful settlement of the dispute in question. “The riots claimed 47 lives. The order came after a 45-minute hearing before the bank that was closely observed by lawyers from both sides.

SIZE-1 (2)

SG criticizes “rushed” audience in HC

Attorney General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Delhi police and the Delhi government, criticized the hasty hearing before the Delhi high court last month before a bank headed by Judge S Muralidhar, before his transfer to the higher court of Punjab and Haryana. Later, a bank headed by the President of the Supreme Court, D N Patel, postponed the hearing until April 13.

“We told the court that we have to go through 7,000 videos and more than 1,000 speeches, which were inflammatory. We also told you that the situation is not conducive to the registration of an FIR since we are trying to restore law and order and, in the prevailing circumstances, we defer registration of FIRs against those who delivered incendiary speeches, ”said the SG.

CJI Bobde asked: “Is the situation conducive today? Will you register the FIRs now? This laugh evoked from a section of lawyers. An annoying CJI said: “We are going to stop the audience. It is a courtroom and not a meeting place. “The SG replied:” There are inflammatory speeches from both sides. What the petitioners have done is selectively cite certain speeches. If we had begun to register FIRs against community leaders without controlling the situation of law and order, it would have exploded. ”

When appearing before the petitioners, lead lawyer Colin Gonsalves said: “If they had arrested those who delivered incendiary speeches that went viral and caused disturbances, the carnage in Delhi could have stopped.” CJI Bobde said: “We have some experience in riots. His statement (from Gonsalves) is not always true. Generally speaking and without referring to the riots in Delhi, we know from experience that sometimes, when the police arrest the leaders, the riots erupt. What happened in the Mumbai riots? A few shakha pramukhs (Shiv Sena officials) were arrested and riots broke out. ”

Gonsalves said: “When the leaders stand next to the police and say that the police are with them and go to freedom due to their proximity to the ruling party, situations get worse.” The CJI said: “These accusations can be established only after a thorough investigation. What is the urgency today? As you admit, objectionable slogans (desh ke gaddaron ko …) were made for the first time on January 21, why didn’t you submit a FIR then? ”

Gonsalves replied: “We do not think the slogan would go viral and cause disturbances. We think it was a political trick. But we were demoralized by the HC that postponed the hearing until April 13. The higher court took the same approach in the police accusation. against the students of Jamia. The court heard the case on December 19 and then postponed it until February 2 “.

The SG said: “I was more than demoralized by the way the higher court held the hearing. I faced constant interference from a section of lawyers present in court during the hearing … We have registered 468 FIR. And those who incited disturbances will also be taken to the book. ”

Times of India