A district stayed a magistrate court order that had directed the Delhi Police to investigate the alleged role of BJP leader and Delhi Law and Justice Minister Kapil Mishra in the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
| Photo Credit: PTI
A district court here on Wednesday (April 9, 2025) stayed a magistrate court order that had directed the Delhi Police to investigate the alleged role of BJP leader and Delhi Law and Justice Minister Kapil Mishra in the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
Special Judge Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Courts issued notice to the respondents on a revision petition filed by the Delhi Police. The police challenged the April 1 order for further investigation passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Vaibhav Chaurasia.
In its plea, the Delhi Police argued that the ACJM’s order was liable to be set aside, contending that the trial court erred in directing further investigation when the complainant had initially sought the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
Represented by special public prosecutor Amit Prasad, the police stated that the trial court attempted to encroach upon the jurisdiction of the Special Court already handling the larger conspiracy case related to the riots, despite being aware of its pendency. The police also objected to certain portions of the lower court’s order, describing them as ‘unwarranted remarks on the Prosecution’s case’.
Issuing notice returnable on April 21, 2025, Special Judge Baweja requisitioned the records from the ACJM court. “In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order [of the ACJM] shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing,” the court directed.
The case originates from a complaint filed last December by Mohammed Ilyas, a resident of Yamuna Vihar. Mr. Ilyas sought FIRs against six individuals, including Mr. Mishra, alleging that the BJP leader and his associates blocked a road in Kardampuri on February 23, 2020, and damaged carts belonging to Muslim and Dalit vendors. The complaint also accused police officials, specifically naming then DCP Ved Prakash Surya, of complicity and of threatening consequences if protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act were not halted.
While ordering the further probe against Mr. Mishra on April 1, ACJM Chaurasia had reprimanded the Delhi Police for indulging in “several interpretations and guesswork”. The court noted that Mr. Mishra himself acknowledged during questioning that he was present in the area during the riots and knew the people gathered. “Therefore the presence of accused cannot be ruled out, further fortifying the allegations of the complainant,” the ACJM court had observed.
It also strongly criticised the police interrogator and called for further questioning of the then DCP Surya, stating he possibly knew “something which this Judiciary does not”.
Published – April 10, 2025 02:11 am IST
