Kapil Mishra challenges trial court's decision on alleged inflammatory remarks in Delhi HC
The allegations stem from Mishra's January 2020 remarks, where he referred to Shaheen Bagh, a Muslim-majority area, as "mini-Pakistan," allegedly to polarise voters ahead of the 2020 assembly elections, which were said to violate the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and included "objectionable statements."
ANI
Mar 17, 2025 22:06 IST
New Delhi [India], March 17 (ANI): Delhi Law Minister Kapil Mishra has approached the Delhi High Court, challenging a trial court's decision to dismiss his plea seeking to quash proceedings against him.
The allegations stem from Mishra's January 2020 remarks, where he referred to Shaheen Bagh, a Muslim-majority area, as "mini-Pakistan," allegedly to polarise voters ahead of the 2020 assembly elections, which were said to violate the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and included "objectionable statements."
The FIR against Mishra was filed following a letter from the Returning Officer of the Model Town Assembly Constituency, citing violations of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and the RP Act.
The bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja is to hear this matter on March 18, 2025.
On March 7, 2025, the Rouse Avenue Court rejected Mishra's revision petition against the trial court's cognizance and summoning order in the case. The trial court had observed that Mishra deliberately used the term "Pakistan" to incite communal tensions for electoral advantage.
The court emphasized the Election Commission's responsibility to prevent candidates from disrupting the electoral environment with divisive rhetoric.
The court concluded that the evidence provided by the Returning Officer and the Election Commission was sufficient to justify the trial court's cognizance under Section 125 of the Representation of People Act (RP Act).
Dismissing Mishra's argument that his statements did not explicitly reference any religion, the court found the term "Pakistan" to be a clear innuendo targeting a specific religious community, the court emphasised that indirect violations of Section 125 of the RP Act cannot be permitted, as they undermine the provision's intent to prevent communal enmity.
Mishra's counsel had also contended that the offense under Section 125 of the Representation of People Act (RP Act) was non-cognizable, citing precedents from the Karnataka High Court. However, the court rejected this claim, affirming the charges' validity. (ANI)
Tags:
Get the App
