Read Time: 04 minutes

A Delhi High Court bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar today noted that there seemed to be no sense of urgency or solemnity attached to a batch of petitions seeking prosecution of politicians for alleged hate speeches made during the Delhi Riots of 2020.

The Court was dealing with the issue of how notice to several politicians to make them respondents in the case, was not served because of the lawyers' negligence in failing to file the process fee or to provide proper addresses.

The Court issued notice again to Union Minister Anurag Thakur, Indian National Congress (INC) leaders Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi as well as Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia.

Out of over 20 people arrayed as respondents, incorrect addresses were provided for at least 9 of them, including Umar Khalid, and former Bombay High Court judge, Justice BG Kolse Patil.

Giving them 2 days' time to make corrections as necessary, the Court expressed disbelief on the statement that the parties had failed to provide the correct addresses of a retired High Court judge.

"One of the persons made party in your application is a retired judge. He is a retired judge and you can't find his address?" the bench asked.

It also pointed out that it was only on the petitioners' insistence that the Supreme Court had directed them to decide the matter in 3 months, yet, now they had failed to follow through with basic processes.

The matter will now be heard on April 29.

Background

The Court was hearing a batch of petitions demanding registration of first information reports (FIRs) against several politicians for their role in instigating the Delhi Riots that took place across the city in the year 2020. 

Examining the maintainability of this batch of pleas which pertain to criminal cases, the bench of Justice Mridul and Justice Bhambhani had earlier noted that people against whom petitioners had sought investigation and inquiry were not even made parties in the matter.

Cause Title: Shaikh Mujtaba Farooq and Ors vs Union of India and Ors