'Mulle, Tujhe Aur Tera...': Court Orders Hate Speech FIR in Delhi Riots Case

The judge came down at the police that they neither addressed the hate speech allegations nor probed independently.

A Delhi court has ordered the police to file an FIR against accused Hindu men in a Delhi riots case.

(Photo: Vibhushita Singh/The Quint)

(Trigger Warning: This piece contains details of hate speech. Exposing hate and communalism is a key focus area in The Quint's reportage. Become a member and help us do more such stories).

Coming as an important development in the 2020 Delhi riots legal proceedings, a court has ordered the police to register an FIR against men accused of hate speech, provocative slogans and indulging in communal violence.

The Quint has an order copy that was came forth on 24 July. Regarding the complaint filed by one of the victims of the pogrom, Rahees Ahmed, Judicial Magistrate First Class Isra Zaidi of Karkardooma Courts stated that "the police have failed to act upon the same appropriately at the relevant time."

The pogrom that erupted in February 2020 claimed the lives of over 50 individuals and injured hundreds. The pogrom remains among the worst acts of communal violence in Delhi in recent times.

The order states that the complainant and his family were subjected to a targeted and violent attack by a mob comprising of persons namely Vinod, Tinku, Aadesh Sharma, Mahesh, Suresh, Monu, Anshu Pandit Rajpal, and others. The complaint narrated in the complaint that the attackers were armed with weapons including lathis, iron rods, and petrol bombs.

"They raised provocative communal slogans and used hate speech with an intent to incite violence and instill fear. The complainant further stated that the house was vandalized and looted, valuable items including jewellery and cash were stolen. The tent house set was burnt down, and the property was destroyed," read the order. Adding that stones were pelted at Ahmed too.

'Desh Ke Gaddaro Ko...' Slogans Also Raised

In the order, the complainant has also claimed that one person named Aadesh Sharma held a gun in his hand and shouted, "Mulle, tujhe aur tere pure khandan ko aaj katal karna hai, tumhe yahan rehne ka koi hak nahi pakistaniyo." (Muslim, you and your family will be killed today, you have no right to live here, Pakistanis).

Furthermore, the other accomplices chanted, "Desh ke gaddaro ko goli maaro salo, mullo ke do sthan Pakistan ya kabristan,” (Shoot the country's enemies, Muslims have two places, Pakistan or graveyard). A reminder that the latter slogan was raised BJP MP Anurag Thakur at a rally some weeks before the Delhi riots.

The order also stated that Ahmed alleged more slogans were raised such as, “Jagdish Pradhan zindabad Kapil Mishra zindabad.” Another accused, Tinku shouted “Abey, Suresh dekhta kya hai is mulle par petrol bomb maar sala yahi jalkar mar jayega.” (Suresh, what are you looking at? Throw a petrol bomb at the Muslim, he will burn and die here).

'Allegations Neither Addressed, Nor Probed Independently': Court to Police

The police inaction was criticised by the Judge who stated that even though Ahmed had lodged a written complaint on 1 March 2020, the police did not register an independent FIR.

Rather his complaint was clubbed with FIR number 117/20, based on another occurrence later in the day involving different persons. The police then explained that 29 complaints were clubbed under this generic FIR.

FIR No.117/2020, PS Karawal Nagar is based on a different set of events which took place at shop of Aazad Singh. It is silent about chanting of any provocative slogans by the accused persons, the court observed.

"The complainant’s allegations have neither been appropriately addressed in that FIR nor investigated independently. Commissioner of Police, no separate action was taken. Therefore, it is prayed by way of the present application that the concerned SHO be directed to register an FIR against the accused persons," directed the order.

Additionally, Judge Zaidi pointed out that the registration of FIR is mandatory if information discloses a commission of cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible under such situation.

When the court perused the records It was determined that Ahmed’s complaint was separate both in terms of the time and the accused which carried out the crimes, and these were not indicated in the FIR 117/20. The court disapproved the mechanical clubbing of FIRs by the police.

"The complainant has made serious allegations of communal violence, looting, arson, hate speech naming specific individuals with detailed roles. In such circumstances, the complainant cannot be compelled to seek redressal through a general or unrelated FIR that does not capture his distinct allegations. Such grave allegations cannot be permitted to be diluted or ignored merely by clubbing with a general FIR," reads the order.

To elaborate on the same, the court noted judgments such as T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala (2001) 6 SCC 181 "which prohibits registration of multiple FIRs for the same incident, does not apply when the version of the complainant has been excluded or distinct offences against different accused persons have not been addressed."

Compliance report shall be filed within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order and the order has also been sent to the deputy Commissioner of police, (Northeast -Delhi ) to oversee the investigation from thereon.