Delhi Court Refuses FIR Against BJP Leader Kapil Mishra In 2020 North-East Delhi Riots Case
A Delhi court had refused to order registration of an FIR against BJP leader Kapil Mishra in relation to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots while allowing the complainant to pursue the case as a private complaint
A Delhi court refused to direct registration of an FIR against BJP leader Kapil Mishra over allegations linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots
A Delhi court on Friday refused to direct the registration of an FIR against BJP leader and Delhi Minister Kapil Mishra over allegations relating to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Ashwani Panwar dismissed an application filed by complainant Mohd. Ilyas seeking a direction to the police to register an FIR against Mishra and several others.
“Keeping in view of the above findings, prayer for registration of FIR against BJP MLA Kapil Mishra and others, on the basis of application under Section 175(3) of the BNSS is hereby rejected,” the court said.
However, the court directed that the application be treated as a private complaint. It granted liberty to the complainant to lead evidence in support of his allegations under Section 210(1)(a) read with Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The matter has been listed for March 27 for the examination of the complainant.
The plea had sought registration of an FIR against Mishra, the then Station House Officer of Dayalpur police station and several others, including BJP MLA Mohan Singh Bisht and former BJP legislators Jagdish Pradhan and Satpal Sansad.
In his complaint, Ilyas alleged that on February 23, 2020, he witnessed Mishra and his associates blocking a road and vandalising street vendors’ carts while police officials stood nearby. He further claimed that protestors were warned to vacate the area or face consequences.
The Delhi Police opposed the plea and argued that there was a deliberate attempt to falsely implicate Mishra in connection with the riots. The police submitted that Mishra’s alleged role had already been investigated and no incriminating evidence was found against him.
According to the prosecution, several WhatsApp groups, including “Delhi Protest Support Group,” had circulated messages attempting to build a narrative against Mishra on social media using the hashtag “#ArrestKapilMishra.”
The police further submitted that the violence during the 2020 riots resulted from a broader conspiracy aimed at escalating protests into road blockades and unrest in sensitive areas, particularly near mosques, mazars and major roads.
After considering the submissions and material placed on record, the court declined to order an FIR but allowed the complainant to pursue the matter by leading evidence in support of his allegations.
In a related news, in November 2025, the court had struck down an order directing “further investigation” against BJP leader Kapil Mishra in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots, describing the magistrate’s approach as “flawed theory-building” and a clear instance of jurisdictional overreach.
In a detailed order dated November 10, 2025, Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh set aside the ACJM’s April 1, 2025 order passed in a complaint by Mohammad Ilyas, calling it “illegal, improper and unsustainable in law.”
The Court ruled that the ACJM had no power to order “further investigation” in FIR No. 59/2020, a case already under the cognizance of a Special Court dealing with the larger conspiracy behind the riots.
“The Ld. ACJM travelled beyond his authority and dealt with issues already within the domain of the trial court,” the revisional Court observed, adding that once the final report had been filed and cognizance taken, “the Magistrate could not have invoked powers under Section 175(3) BNSS (akin to Section 156(3) CrPC).”