The High Court on Monday restrained Delhi Police from issuing any communication to the media relating to the north-east Delhi riots cases, including that of Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita, till the trial in the cases commence.
“The cases concerning communal riots are undoubtedly sensitive,” Justice Vibhu Bakru remarked, while ordering the police “not to issue any further communication naming any accused or any witness till the charges, if any, are framed and the trial is commenced”. The court also ordered that unless directed otherwise, the trial is required to be conducted in open court.
The decision came on Ms. Kalita’s petition seeking direction to Delhi Police to not leak any allegations pertaining to her to the media pending investigation. Ms. Kalita had argued that a press note issued on June 2 by police selectively leaking information relating to her case was causing grave prejudice to her.
Delhi Police’s press note stated that Ms. Kalita, along with others, were actively involved in hatching a conspiracy to cause riots. “The fact that the petitioner [Ms. Kalita] had been arrested in FIR no. 50/2020 has been well publicised. Therefore, her being named in the impugned [press] note cannot be considered to be prejudicial to a fair trial that may ensue,” the court said.
“Although, it is correct that the petitioner has been effectively declared to be guilty of the said conspiracy. However, the press release must be read in its context – a chargesheet containing the said allegation is being filed in court,” Justice Bakru said.
“The police authorities are not the adjudicators of guilt or innocence of any person...Thus, what is reported is their inference from the investigations, which is articulated in the report [the chargesheet] filed before the court concerned,” the High Court said. “This court is unable to accept that the said police communication violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner or provisions of any law,” it added.
The court, however, observed the contention raised by police, that it was necessary to name Ms. Kalita in view of the campaign being run on social media, was “not persuasive”. “Clearly, it is not necessary to name the accused in media reports,” it remarked, noting that FIRs filed in the riots cases are not being publicly disclosed.
Ms. Kalita had also contended that the press note suggests that a whatsapp chat, suggesting actions that should be taken by household women in case of riots, was found on her phone.
Responding to this, the court said, “a reading of the impugned note also indicates that the impugned note does not allege that the said whatsapp chat was found on the phone of the petitioner.”
