Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court's Final Order on Framing Charges in 2020 Riots Conspiracy Case

The Delhi High Court has directed the Trial Court to withhold its final order on framing charges in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case until September 23. The directive followed pleas from accused Devangana Kalita, who is seeking video and WhatsApp evidence from the Delhi Police.

The Delhi High Court instructed the Trial Court on Thursday to delay its final order on framing charges for the alleged larger conspiracy in the 2020 Delhi riots case until September 23. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna issued the directive while hearing pleas from Devangana Kalita, who is seeking evidence from the Delhi Police.

On November 16, 2023, the High Court issued a notice to the Delhi Police regarding Kalita's plea. She has requested the court to instruct the Delhi Police to provide videos of the Jafrabad protest and WhatsApp chats. Kalita also sought a stay on trial court proceedings, which the High Court refused to grant.

Accused in the larger conspiracy case related to the Delhi riots, Kalita filed two petitions for the video evidence recorded by Delhi Police at Jafrabad in February 2020. Advocate Adit S Pujari, representing Kalita, argued that these videos, which were not included in the presented charge sheet, are crucial for her defense.

Kalita's counsel contended that selective photos from the video were taken but not supplied to the accused. He argued that the videos would demonstrate that their protest at Jafrabad was peaceful and accused the police of withholding evidence under the pretext of an ongoing investigation.

The defense argued that, despite four years having passed, the probe remains incomplete. The videos, listed as evidence, are claimed to capture the events and show interactions between both communities. The defense contends the videos would clarify accusations that they murdered their own men.

Special Public Prosecutor Madhukar Pandey, representing the Delhi Police, objected to the petition's maintainability. He emphasized that the investigation is ongoing and claimed recent arrests of those involved. Pandey noted that evidence against the accused extends beyond videos.

After hearing the arguments, Justice Amit Bansal questioned the SPP on their reluctance to provide the videos, considering they were part of the charge sheet. The High Court's decision to withhold the Trial Court's final order emerges amidst these ongoing judicial proceedings.

(With inputs from agencies.)