New Delhi: Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court Friday dismissed a plea filed by Delhi law minister Kapil Mishra against the cognizance and summoning order of a trial court in a case of alleged violation of model code of conduct in 2020 over his statements.
The court said his alleged remarks appeared to be a “brazen attempt to promote enmity on the grounds of religion by way of indirectly referring to a ‘country’ which unfortunately…is often used to denote the members of a particular religion”.
Mishra claimed his statement did not refer to any caste, community, religion
The word ‘Pakistan’ is very skilfully weaved by the revisionist in his alleged statements to spew hatred, careless to communal polarisation that may ensue in the election campaign, only to garner votes,” the court of special judge Jitendra Singh said.
Delhi Police lodged an FIR against Mishra over his controversial tweet in which he likened the assembly elections to an India versus Pakistan contest. The FIR was filed following directions of the poll authorities at Model Town Police Station under Section 125 (promoting enmity between classes in connection with election) of Representation of the People Act.
The allegations against the minister are that he made objectionable statements in electronic media that “Delhi mein chhote chhote Pakistan bane”, “Shaheen Bagh mein Pak ki entry” in January 2020, and also posted tweets of these.
The court rejected Mishra’s submissions that his alleged statement nowhere refers to any caste, community, religion, race, and language but has referred to a country which is not prohibited under section 125 of the RP Act.
The court said this submission is simply “preposterous and outrightly untenable, the implicit reference underlying the particular ‘country’ in the alleged statement is an unmistaken innuendo to persons of a particular ‘religious community’, apparent to generate enmity amongst religious communities”.
Observing that this can be effortlessly understood even by a layman, let alone by a reasonable man, the court said accepting Mishra’s submission would be “blatant negation of, and brutal violence with, the spirit underlying the provision of Section 125 of the RP Act”.
Further remarking that EC is under a constitutional obligation to prevent candidates from indulging in vitriolic vituperation with impunity, vitiating and contaminating the atmosphere for free and fair elections, the court said it is in complete agreement with the trial court that the complaint filed by the returning officer, notification of EC, and other documents were sufficient to take cognisance of the offence punishable under Section 125 of the RP Act.
