[Breaking] "This city has seen enough violence," HC asks Delhi Police to take a conscious decision on registration of FIRs by tomorrow

The Delhi High Court today directed the Delhi Police to take a "conscious decision" on the registration of FIRs against political leaders alleged to have made speeches that led to the riots in the capital city over the past few days. The matter will be taken up again tomorrow. .The Court has clarified that the Commissioner of Delhi Police will not only consider the allegedly inflammatory clips featuring BJP leaders Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma and Kapil Mishra but also other similar clips that are in the knowledge of the Delhi Police..It should seriously consider the consequences that would ensue with every day's delay in registering the FIR not only on the basis of the video clips that have been played in Court but all video clips of speeches/actions by anyone, whosoever it may be, which disclose ex facie the commission of an offence, bearing in mind that the rule of law is supreme and that no one is above the lawJustice Muralidhar, Delhi High Court.A Division Bench of Justices S Muralidhar and Talwant Singh was hearing Petition by activist Harsh Mander in connection with the riots in the city's North East area. This matter, which was initially supposed to come up before the Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel, was heard by the Bench headed by Justice Muralidhar, as the former as well as the second senior-most Judge, Justice GS Sistani was on leave..In passing today's order, the High Court emphasised that the authorities must go strictly by the mandate of the law. One must seriously consider the consequences of the delay in registering FIR against hate speech, the Bench observed, also adding that the rule of law is supreme. .Notably, the Court also took note of an undertaking given by a police officer present in Court that he would personally sit with the Police Commissioner in perusing the videos containing the hate speech that is alleged to have triggered the riots in Delhi. ..Apart from seeking registration of FIR against certain BJP leaders for hate speech, the petition had also sought constitution of the SIT, deployment of army, compensation to those wounded and killed etc..While pressing for the impleadment of Union of India in the petition, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had today sought an adjournment for a day to allow it to file a response to the prayers. .Mehta today submitted that the nature of prayers in the Petition was not "urgent" in nature. Given the statements made during the speeches, the Court however directed SG Mehta to address the Court with regards the registration of FIR against the BJP leaders.."A law officer has the highest trust of the judiciary. You have flagged the issue of urgency before us. Why as a law officer do you think prayer 1 (on registration of FIR) is not urgent?"the Court asked."The prayer came after 20 days of the Statement. Let us not not make it unpleasant", SG Mehta replied.."The situation out there is unpleasant", Justice Muralidhar said..Mehta conceded that he had not seen any of the video clips and sought time for instructions. The Delhi Police Officer present in Court also stated that he had not seen the video clip featuring Kapil Mishra..The Court then played the Kapil Mishra clip in Court, after taking serious note of the submission that the senior police officer had also not watched the video clips in question. .I amazed at the state of affairs of Delhi Police,Justice Muralidhar remarked..The Court also pointed out that a DCP could be seen standing next to Mishra in the clip. As the clip ended, Justice Muralidhar told Solicitor General Mehta,"Now that you have watched it, you advice the Commissioner so that we don't have to pass any order.".The hearing was then adjourned till post lunch. After the Bench re-assembled for lunch, Solicitor General Mehta informed the Court that, ."I have spoken to the Senior Officer. A stand has been taken with respect to the first clip, examination of others in underway." .He further submitted that the question of registration of FIR and when to register is very crucial and that the police would take a call at an appropriate stage. Mehta requested that the Court wait for the response of the authority in the matter. .He added that it is advisable not to respond right away to the prayer by Mander, observing that aggravation of the situation must be avoided. .The submission was, however, objected to by the standing counsel for Delhi, Advocate Rahul Mehra, who argued, "This cannot be the stand of the Delhi Police because it has to come through me. I have to go through the status report and satisfy my conscience.".Mehra added that, ."I don't see why an FIR should not be registered. A cognizable offence is writ large in these video clips. If there is no evidence, Delhi Police can file a cancellation report later."Advocate Rahul Mehra.Appearing for Mander, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves also opposed the submissions by Mehta on this count, contending that, ."It is shocking to hear the other side say that we should wait. It is a case of immediate arrest of those persons.. the slogans created a fear in the hearts of the people..some took out procession as a direct follow up of the slogans raised by Anurag Thakur.".Following this submission, the Justice Muralidhar remarked, "Mr. Mehta, if you have not seen the video, we will play them."."No, no," responded Solicitor General Mehta..The Court eventually played more video clips of political leaders making speeches that were connected to the Delhi riots including those byBJP leaders, Abhay Verma, Parvesh Verma and Anurag Thakur..Referring to the same, Gonsalves also submitted that, "Anurag Thakur's video caused the ball to roll. It's just that one line. It's a very powerful video. That's the starting point."."I hope they have given it to the Police to take cognizance", Solicitor General Mehta commented, referring to the videos played. .To this, Gonsalves responded, "I don't even want to answer whether we have given it to the Police." He further added later that, "The fact that these people were so senior, it seems that it was part of the political policy.".Amidst these submissions, a lawyer in Court rose to state that there are also speeches by Asaduddin Owaisi and other leaders as well on the issue. However, the Court observed that they would watch those clips if necessary, while directing the lawyer to refrain from interrupting. .At a later stage of the hearing, Solicitor General Mehta also echoed similar submissions. He said, ."There are multiple clips. The petitioner must explain how did he choose those three clips to file a PIL. This is selective outrage."Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.At this point, a lawyer in Court again attempted to bring the Court's attention to clips featuring Owaisi, prompting Justice Talwant Singh to remark, "Don't interrupt. We have have told you 10 times.".Gonsalves continued pressing for directions from the Court, including for "strong words on how the police should act." .Meanwhile, the Court was also informed that the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has reserved orders in a plea seekign resgitartion of FIRs against Thakur and Verma. .Incidents of violence independent of speeches: Delhi Police to Court in plea for hate speech FIR against Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Sahib Singh.Gonsalves went on to argue, ."You are a Constitutional Court. Please don't hold back even for a minute. As we speak, attacks are taking place."Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves.To this, Mehta countered saying, "There are no attacks. These things are being sensationalised." He further submitted, "It is a delicate situation and Delhi Police is taking care of. There are acid attacks, police personnel are dying."."We urge you to not take action under extraordinary powers based upon selective selection of clips. There are hate speeches from every quarter."Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.These counter-submissions raised more concern for the Bench, which queried, "So apart from these three, there are other hate speech FIRs also that have not been registered? I will take your word for it that those clips also make out cognizable offences ..."."You are saying that the Police not only failed to take action in these three clips but many more clips?"Justice S Muralidhar.Mehta responded to this saying, "All I am saying is that don't do anything right now. It is being considered. It will registered at an appropriate stage.".The Court, however, rebutted critically, observing, "We cannot be blind. How many more lived have to be lost, how many property have to be destroyed?"."It will be registered when situation is conducive", Mehta said, also proceeding to request that the Court not become "angry." To this, Justice Muralidhar responded saying, "This is not anger, this is anguish.".The Delhi Police officer present was also later queried over these submissions. The Court observed, "Solicitor General of India says there are other clips as well which have inflammatory speeches, yet there is not action.".Justice Muralidhar further observed, "You acknowledge the occurrence of a crime by registering an FIR ... If you don't register an FIR, how will you take action. More you delay .... these speeches are leading to more speeches.".He went on to add, "Yet you are saying which is the appropriate stage? Just register an FIR, communicate it to your Commissioner of Police. This is the anguish of a Constitutional Court."."Why are you not showing alacrity when it comes to registration of FIR in these cases? ... We want peace to prevail. This city was seen enough violence. Let is not repeat 1984."Delhi High Court.As the hearing concluded, the Court asked Solicitor General Mehta to place before the Police other hate speech videos that he is aware of. Mehta, however, responded that he only referred to the existence of more videos to point out that the PIL is based on selectively chosen videos. ."The city is burning," remarked the Court, shortly before it began dictating today's order. .Mehta, however, re-asserted that, "The city is not burning. It's only few areas."."Amazed at state of affairs of Delhi Police", Delhi HC hears Harsh Mander’s plea concerning Delhi Riots [LIVE UPDATES].The Division Bench comprising Justices S Mauralidhar and Anup J Bhambhami also appointed Advocate Zubeda Begum as Amicus Curiae in another matter concerning riots in the city's North East area..Read the Order: