On Friday, 21st July 2023, the Delhi High Court set aside the trial court’s order directing Delhi Police to register an FIR against Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leader Alok Kumar on a complaint filed by activist Harsh Mander for allegedly giving a hate speech during a VHP rally in 2019.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said in the order, “Harsh Mander had not levelled any allegation against Kumar in the complaint which he had lodged with the police. The single line averred against Kumar in his complaint filed before the magistrate on the face of it does not constitute any offence, or make out any case against Kumar.”
“Harsh Mander had not leveled any allegation against Kumar in the complaint which he had lodged with the police. The single line averred against Kumar in his complaint filed before the magistrate on the face of it does not constitute any offence, or make out any case against…
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2023
She further noted, “Even if the allegations made in the complaint are determined to be true, even then, no offence was disclosed to have been committed by the petitioner (Alok Kumar).”
Court: Even if the allegations made in the complaint are determined to be true, even then, no offence was disclosed to have been committed by the petitioner (Kumar).#DelhiHighCourt #HateSpeech
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2023
The court also remarked, “Records of the case will also reveal that it is a case which is not a case for insufficient evidence, but of no incriminating material against him (Alok Kumar) at all.”
Justice Sharma observed, “In a country like India know one or two rather, all communities have respected each other and have lived a harmonious life. While passing such cases the magistrates even if they disagree with the detailed action report filed on record, the court while focusing on non-discrimination, has to take into consideration that communal peace cannot be taken lightly and tolerance of cultural and religious values between different communities has to be kept in mind.”
“In a country like India know one or two rather, all communities have respected each other and have lived a harmonious life. While passing such cases the magistrates even if they disagree with the detailed action report filed on record, the court while focusing on non…
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2023
She further said, “In this backdrop, this court notes that in this case, the police had found that there was no material against the present petitioner or having either delivered a speech or to have ignited any communal disharmony. This court, therefore, cautions that while passing such orders, the judges have to be careful that in case there is no disharmony due to any speech, which was allegedly delivered, and not a past as the present one, could have rather ignited communal disharmony.”
Court: This court therefore, cautions that while passing such orders, the judges have to be careful that in case there is no disharmony due to any speech, which was allegedly delivered, and not a past as the present one, could have rather ignited communal disharmony.…
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2023
In 2020, VHP leader Alok Kumar approached the court seeking the quashing of a trial court order passed on 8th February 2020. On 20th March 2020, Justice Yogesh Khanna issued a stay on the trial court order. The trial court’s order had directed the registration of an FIR against Alok Kumar and a Hindu seer from Kashi. The allegations were related to Alok Kumar allegedly inciting violence against members of the Muslim community in connection with the vandalisation of a temple in Lal Kuan, Old Delhi, in July 2019.
During the court proceedings, Senior Advocates Mohit Mathur and Abhishek Attrey, along with Advocates Manisha Agarwal, Varun Maheshwari, Amit Kumar Singh, Manan Soni, Rahul Madan, Deepak Mittal, Rabi Kumar, Divyansh Vajpayee, Rakshita Goyal, Sandeep Singh, Ajay Saini, Sumit Mishra, Nirmala Singh, and Harsh Gautam, represented Alok Kumar. Advocate Daniyal Khan appeared for Mander, while APP Satish Kumar represented Delhi Police.
VHP issues statement
Vishwa Hindu Parishad’s National Spokesperson Vinod Bansal issued a press statement after the verdict was out. According to the statement, Harsh Mander, “who was a member of Sonia Gandhi’s kitchen cabinet,” had written a letter to Delhi Police alleging that a Sanyasi had given a provocative speech in a meeting of Vishwa Hindu Parishad. While Mandar demanded an FIR against him, the name of Alok Kumar was not mentioned in the letter.
The statement states that after a probe, police found nothing objectionable in the speech by the Sanyasi. After that, Mandar moved to court demanding FIR against the Sanyasi, and also included Alok Kumar’s name in his plea. But Harsh Mandar didn’t allege that Alok Kumar had given any speech in that meeting, he also didn’t claim that the VHP leader was present in the meeting, or that he had organized this meeting. It was only written in the petition that Alok Kumar is the working president of Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Despite this, the magistrate ordered that an FIR be registered against him.
Therefore, Kumar moved the High Court challenging the magistrate’s order, and the order was stayed by the court in the first hearing itself. The High Court observed that there was no allegation against Alok Kumar in the petition. The court noted that even if if everything written in Mander’s petition is to be accepted as true, no blame can be made out against Kumar, as the petition has no allegation against him.
