In a case related to the Delhi Riots of February 2020, the Union Government of India submitted an affidavit in Delhi High Court suggesting that the reports by a private organisation or extra judicial commission have put a biased and selective narrative to set the public mood in favour of a particular community. The Delhi High Court was hearing a petition filed by Advocate Dharmesh Sharma who was also a victim of the communal violence. In his petition, Sharma challenged the fact-finding committee report under Delhi Minority Commission (DMC).
In his petition, Sharma had requested the court to quash the DMC Committee report that was submitted on June 27, 2020. He also challenged several private reports including those of Human Rights Watch, the Citizens and Lawyers Initiative and Amnesty International that were released in connection to the anti-Hindu Delhi riots of February 2020. Sharma urged the court to declare such reports null and void. He also requested the court to pass an order that no judicial process should rely on such reports.
The bench comprising chief justice Satish Chandra Sharma and justice Subramonium Prasad heard the petition. The case has now been transferred to the bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Talwant Singh, which is hearing all matters linked to the Delhi Riots.
In its affidavit, the Centre told the court that the tone and tenor of the report were biased and selective. The Centre said, “It cannot be denied that the conclusions of such reports can impact the just decisions of a case.” The affidavit was submitted to the court in September 2022. At that time, it was not brought on record on the date of the hearing. The court had set the next date of hearing as January 31, 2023.
The Centre said, “The unverified and, biased facts and conclusion mentioned in the said reports by authors who held high offices in the government of India or have been former constitutional authorities, not only pollute the mind of the public but also influence fair administration of justice and impairs the right to justice guaranteed to the victims and the accused.” Furthermore, the Centre told the court that these committees have completely ignored the fact that the Delhi Police filed 750 FIRs and three special teams of the crime branch were formed to ensure an impartial investigation in the matter. The Centre backed Delhi Police and said it acted impartially and fairly.
The Centre also noted that the Committee was formed by DMC to report on the subject in which it had no power under the Act. “The said report is without jurisdiction, null and void,” the Centre added.
The Centre also raised questions about the former chairman of DMC Zafar-ul-Islam. In the affidavit, Centre said Khan had thanked Kuwait for standing with Indian Muslims and warned Hindus of facing an avalanche from the Muslim World. It was a malicious act by Khan as Kuwait had never issued any statement in this regard. The Centre said, “It is submitted that the said person has since been made an accused in an FIR under Section 124 and 153-A of the Indian Penal Code). Thus, it is evident that the very conduct/motive/mindset of the Chairman of the DMC, i.e. Dr Zafarul-Islam Khanwas full of bias at the time when he exercised powers under section 10 of the DMC Act.”
The Centre added that DMC failed to note the Delhi Riots were part of a larger conspiracy. IT added, “It also failed to observe that, efforts were made to disrupt communal harmony in the state and to perpetrate chaos in the society. It appears that a selective and biased approach was adopted by the Committee to mould the public opinion in favour of a particular community”.
“Thus, even if an iota of credence is given out to such 3rd party reports, then the very essence of having a criminal justice system would fail; leading to the failure of democracy and anarchy. As such for this reason also the present petition is liable to be allowed and a declaration ought to be made that no report of any private tribunal/fact-finding body is cited as evidence before any court of law,” the affidavit noted.
Reports by non-judicial committees claimed the state failed to safeguard Muslims
In its “fact-finding” report, DMC’s committee had claimed that the violence was “planned and targeted” insinuating that it was against Muslims. It added that there were repeated cases of violence in Delhi from December 2019 to February 2020 amidst Delhi assembly polls. The report claimed that 592 of the 600 women surveyed said that people from other communities did not discriminate against them. Only 8 said they did. Furthermore, the eight that did say they were discriminated against admitted that only a few people from other communities discriminated against them while they had very cordial relationships with the rest. Reports by other private organisations claimed the state failed to “safeguard Muslims” and did not register complaints against the accused.
