35.1 C
Thursday, June 20, 2024

EU States Approve 14th Sanctions Package Against Russia, Diplomats Say

European Union countries have approved a 14th...

Monsoon Advances, Set To Bring Relief From Heatwave

The monsoon is advancing after stalling for...

Delhi HC refuses plea seeking FIR against Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma

IndiaDelhi HC refuses plea seeking FIR against Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma

Delhi HC refuses a plea seeking FIRs against Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma for their alleged hate speeches in 2020.

Delhi High Court on Monday turned down a petition filed by Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat seeking registration of an FIR against Union Minister Anurag Thakur and BJP Delhi MP Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma for their alleged hate speeches concerning anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) protests in 2020.

Brinda Karat in August 2021 had submitted before the trial court that Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Sahib had ‘sought to incite people as a result of which three incidents of firing occurred at two different protest sites in the National capital.

She submitted that at the Rithala Rally on January 27, 2020, Thakur had ‘egged on’ the crowd to raise an incendiary slogan shoot the traitors after lashing out at anti-CAA protesters, and on January 28, 2020, Pravesh Verma had allegedly made inflammatory comments against the anti-CAA protesters in Shaheen Bagh.

On August 26, 2021, the trial court after hearing the submission dismissed the petition seeking registration of FIR by saying that it was not sustainable as the requisite sanction from the Central Government, the competent authority was not obtained.

After that petitioner moved to Delhi High Court by submitting that a cognizable offense was made out against the two leaders in the present case and police should investigate the matter and should register an FIR against them for their alleged hate speeches concerning the anti-CAA protest at Shaheen Bagh.

Counsel for Delhi Police submitted that the trial court order rightly held that it does not have jurisdiction to deal with the case and referred to the Supreme Court’s judgments which said that if a judge is saying he does not have jurisdiction, he should not comment on merits and that is the right approach.

Delhi High Court Justice Chandra Dhari Singh dismissed the writ petition without knowing the merits of the case by saying that the petition is not maintainable so could not be entertained in view of the settled position of law, where an effective alternative remedy is available the same must be exhausted and High Court intervention should not be exercised except in emergent cases.

It is interesting how hate speech is inculcating a violent society that even escalates to death and is being normalized and an acceptable form of speech in society, where instead of evolving, people are regressing.  More alarming is appears that courts are not picking up these issues seriously.  Hate speech is not equivalent to free speech. While politicians divide, it is heartwarming to see how Kashmir Pandits and other citizens try to unite!

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles