LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Delhi High Court rejects pleas seeking FIRs against politicians over alleged hate speeches linked to 2020 riots

05/10/2026BlogNo Comments

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a batch of petitions seeking registration of criminal cases against several political leaders over alleged hate speeches in the period preceding the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain dismissed 15 petitions concerning allegations of inflammatory speeches, police inaction and the handling of complaints arising from the communal violence that rocked parts of northeast Delhi in February 2020.

The petitions sought directions for registration of FIRs against a number of political leaders, besides demanding an independent investigation into the alleged role of political figures and the response of law-enforcement authorities to the violence.

The leaders named in different petitions included Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra; BJP leaders Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma and Abhay Verma; and AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Amanatullah Khan. AIMIM leader Akbaruddin Owaisi and former MLA Warris Pathan were also among those against whom allegations had been raised.

The petitioners had approached the High Court alleging that speeches delivered by various political figures contained statements capable of provoking hostility between communities and warranted criminal investigation.

Several pleas also questioned the conduct of the Delhi Police, alleging that authorities had failed to take timely action on complaints relating to inflammatory speeches and had not adequately discharged their responsibilities during the period surrounding the riots.

The petitions were filed in the aftermath of the February 2020 violence, which claimed more than 50 lives and left hundreds injured. The proceedings also encompassed allegations connected with the police response to protests and violence at Jamia Millia Islamia in December 2019.

The petitioners had sought, among other reliefs, constitution of a Special Investigation Team to examine the allegations and directions for registration of FIRs where offences were found to have been disclosed.

The proceedings remained pending before the High Court for several years as the court considered the rival contentions and the material placed before it.

With the dismissal of the batch, the specific pleas seeking fresh criminal proceedings and an independent probe into the allegations against the political leaders and police authorities have come to an end before the High Court.

The ruling is confined to the petitions before the Bench and does not bring to a close the various other criminal proceedings arising from the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, including cases concerning allegations of a broader conspiracy behind the violence.

The post Delhi High Court rejects pleas seeking FIRs against politicians over alleged hate speeches linked to 2020 riots appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • We have not approved any modified form 6: Supreme Court clarifies stand on ECI’s SIR voter registration form
  • Supreme Court seeks ECI, Centre response on challenge to CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s alleged unilateral decisions
  • Great Nicobar project: Supreme Court declines to interfere with Calcutta High Court order on PIL maintainability
  • Supreme Court agrees to list plea seeking permission for peaceful protests at Jantar Mantar against CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • Supreme Court to hear 7-Judge Bench reference on Legislative privileges; Tamil Nadu Assembly raises preliminary objection

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.