[Delhi Riots] Accused used Kapil Mishra's name to build a narrative: Prosecution to Delhi court

The prosecutor said there was a "proposal to incite violence" as on February 17, 2020, when Mishra’s name had "not even surfaced."
Kapil Mishra, Karkardooma Court
Kapil Mishra, Karkardooma CourtFacebook
Published on
2 min read

The prosecution in the Delhi Riots case on Monday argued that when the accused were chatting about “inciting violence” on a WhatsApp group, the name of BJP member Kapil Mishra had not even surfaced, indicating that they only needed a name to build their narrative [Umar Khalid v. State].

According to Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad, there was a "proposal to incite violence” as on February 17, 2020, when Mishra’s name had “not even surfaced.”

You want to create a narrative that Kapil Mishra was there and he did blah blah blah. Where is Kapil Mishra on that day? There is your (accused persons) proposal to road blockage and violence,” Prasad submitted before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat.

Prasad is contesting the bail plea of former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Umar Khalid and others who were chargesheeted in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case stemming from the Delhi Riots of February 2020.

The SPP further referred to a WhatsApp chat mentioned in the Delhi Police’s chargesheet from February 23, 2020. He quoted the chat’s content to state,

Abhi toh ye trailer hai. Picture abhi baaki hai (This is just the trailer. The movie is yet to start).

According to the prosecutor, the chat was with respect to six areas in Delhi being blocked and the accused persons wanting to carry on with the planning as part of their alleged conspiracy.

Baaki kya hai? The riots that follow. That's why you still say it is just a trailer,” stressed Prasad.

Prasad then read a chat in which someone purportedly said that nothing had happened in North-East Delhi as the police had whisked Mishra away. He thus argued,

Violence toh karna hai humein. Aur uske liye ek naam chahiye (We have to carry out violence and we require a name to blame it on).”

Towards the end of the hearing, the Court asked the SPP to respond to its queries on distinction among the terms - dharna, protest, bandh, chakka jam and disruptive chakka jam - used during arguments.

The hearing will continue on Wednesday.

Also Read
[Delhi Riots] Accused brought artistes to draw crowds at CAA, NRC protest sites: Prosecution to Delhi court
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com