Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
New Delhi, Nov 10 (IANS) A special court in Delhi on Monday set aside a trial court direction ordering “further investigation” into the alleged role of Delhi minister Kapil Mishra in connection with the 2020 north-east Delhi riots.
Rouse Avenue Court Special Judge Vinay Singh held that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) had committed a “serious jurisdictional error” and exceeded his jurisdiction while investigating the complaint filed by Mohammad Ilyas, a resident of Yamuna Vihar.
The complaint alleged Mishra’s involvement in the riots and also named Mustafabad MLA and Delhi Assembly Deputy Speaker Mohan Singh Bisht as well as former BJP MLA Jagdish Pradhan as responsible for instigating the violence.
In its order, the special court said: “The impugned order (of the ACJM) thus exposes a serious jurisdictional error which renders the order illegal and unsustainable having regard to the ‘first incident’. It is illegal, unreasonable and wrong as it is ultra vires and amounts to an overreach of jurisdiction.”
It said that the ACJM went far beyond the limited scope of Section 175(3) of the BNSS.
“Instead of focusing on whether the ‘first incident’ has been investigated or not, LD ACJM examined and commented on matters already under hearing before the High Court,” the order said.
The special judge condemned the ACJM’s sweeping comments on the Special Cell conspiracy investigation, calling them “unwarranted, speculative and prejudicial”.
The order said: “The impugned order contains a mix between re-investigation and further investigation… The ACJM made a detailed criticism of the manner in which the Special Cell interrogated Kapil Mishra and concluded that Kapil Mishra had no role in initiating or organizing the violence, rendering the impugned order legally challenging and untenable.”
On the complaint itself the court found that it did not clearly disclose a cognizable offence.
“If only the complaint had been studied, it would not have disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence… To consider a cognizable offence, the LD ACJM relied on the analogies and findings of the interrogation of Kapil Mishra in the larger conspiracy case,” it said.
Allowing the revision petitions filed by Delhi Police and Kapil Mishra, the special judge quashed the ACJM’s directions, terming them “illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law”.
–IANS
pds/dan