Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma
Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma
Litigation News

[Breaking] Delhi Court dismisses plea seeking FIR against Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma for hate speech

The plea by Brinda Karat and KM Tiwari was dismissed for lack of previous sanction from the competent authority i.e. Central Government.

Aditi Singh

A Delhi Court today dismissed a plea by CPI(M) leaders Brinda Karat and KM Tiwari seeking registration of FIRs against BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma for hate speech (Brinda Karat v. State).

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja dismissed the application preferred under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for lack of previous sanction from the competent authority, the Central government.

In Februray this year, Karat and Tiwari had filed a complaint before the ACMM seeking a direction to the Parliament Street Police Station to register an FIR against Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma for the commission of offences under Sections 153A/153B/295A/298/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The complainants pointed out that during a rally in Rithala in Delhi, Thakur raised chants of “Desh ke gaddaro ko, goli maaro saalon ko” (Shoot the traitors) with reference to those taking part in peaceful protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.

It was further stated that Verma, on the other hand, gave an interview to ANI on Janaury 28, wherein he was seen making false, provocative and communal statements against the Shaheen Bagh protestors.

However, in its action taken report, Delhi Police claimed before the court that prima facie, no cognizable offence had been found to been committed by Thakur and Verma and that it could not be presumed that their statements speeches incited violence.

The Court had thereafter reserved the plea for orders.

Refusing to accept the complainants' assertion that sanction from Central government under Section 196 CrPC was only required before taking cognizance and not before passing of an order of registration of FIR, the Court today ruled,

"It has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court in Anil Kumar & ors. v. M.K. Aiyappa and Anr Criminal Appeal nos. 1590-1591 of 2013 that “requirement to obtain sanction is mandatory requirement and not directory in nature. If there is no prior sanction, the Magistrate cannot order investigation against a public servant while invoking powers under section 156(3) Cr.P.C."

Admittedly, since there was no previous sanction obtained by the complainants from the Centre to prosecute Thakur and Verma, the court proceeded to dismiss the plea for registration of FIR.

Advocates Tara Narula, Adit S Pujari, Aparajita Sinha, Chaitanya, and Tusharika Mattoo appeared for the complainants.

Read the Order:

Brinda Karat vs State (hate speech FIR order).pdf
Preview
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com