Are speeches made by politicians during CAA/NRC protests being considered by Supreme Court? Delhi High Court asks Delhi Police

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday asked the Delhi Police to confirm whether the alleged hate speeches delivered by various politicians and leaders during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in the national capital in 2019 and 2020 are subject matter of the proceedings before the Supreme Court..A Division Bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Talwant Singh has been hearing nearly half a dozen matters seeking registration of first information reports (FIRs) against such politicians. The petitions have demanded that a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a retired judge be constituted to conduct an inquiry into the role of the Delhi Police in dealing with the 2020 riots, where over 50 people died..One set of pleas filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others seeks an inquiry into the role of the Delhi Police as well as 'right-wing' leaders including Union Minister Anurag Thakur and BJP leaders Kapil Mishra and Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma.The petition filed by an organisation named Lawyer's Voice alleged that speeches delivered by Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi, as well as Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and others, instigated the riots.The Supreme Court has been seized of a bunch of pleas that have highlighted the inflammatory speeches delivered at several gatherings across the country. The petitions before the apex court seek guidelines to regulate such hate speeches..During the hearing today, the Bench asked the counsel whether the speeches that the High Court was considering was the subject matter of proceedings before the Supreme Court. “The idea is to make sure that in this clutter we do not lose the plot. We want to know whether these speeches are subject matter of proceedings before the Supreme Court,” the Bench said.Advocate Rajat Nair, appearing for Delhi Police, said that some of the speeches are part of the pleas before the Supreme Court. However, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for one of the petitioners, said that the petitions before the apex court concern broader guidelines on hate speech, and have nothing to do with the present petitions. The Bench, however, adjourned the matter and asked Nair to inform the Court about the pendency of matters before the Supreme Court by February 2, when the cases will be taken up next. .On the issue of the inquiry by a retired judge, the Court asked the petitioners to show precedents on whether the High Courts can direct a retired judge to do a fact-finding inquiry."The Supreme Court has such powers under Article 142 that the High Court does not exercise," the Bench remarked..Interestingly, the batch of matters pending before the High Court were directed to be heard expeditiously by the Supreme Court. In an order passed in December 2021, the apex court had asked the High Court to decide the matters in three months. When Gonsalves pointed out that there has already been a significant delay in the matters, the Bench responded,“You must bear in mind that none of the parties against whom you are seeking FIR were parties before us. The delay is not because of the Court."