Delhi court sets aside order to register FIR against Kapil Mishra in 2020 riot case

A Delhi sessions court on Monday overturned a lower court order that directed the registration of a first information report (FIR) against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Kapil Mishra, the station house officer (SHO) of Dayalpur police station, and several others in connection with an alleged incident during the Northeast Delhi riots of February 2020.

The decision comes as a significant relief to Kapil Mishra, who has consistently rejected accusations of instigating violence during the period of unrest linked to protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

What did the sessions court say?

Special Judge (PC Act) Dig Vinay Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts set aside the 1 April order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Vaibhav Chaurasiya, Bar and Bench reported.

The magistrate had previously directed the Delhi Police to probe Kapil Mishra’s alleged role in events said to have occurred on 23 February 2020. The sessions court held that the earlier directive could not be sustained.

Quoting from the court’s oral remarks, Special Judge Dig Vijay Singh stated: “The order passed by the Magistrate is set aside qua the alleged incident that took place on February 23.”

What were the allegations against Kapil Mishra?

The plea that led to the original order was filed by Yamuna Vihar resident Mohammad Ilyas, represented by advocate Mehmood Pracha. Ilyas alleged that he witnessed Mishra and others blocking a road in Kardampuri and vandalising vendors’ carts on 23 February 2020.

He further claimed that a senior police official — the then Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) — was standing next to Mishra during the disturbance.

An FIR had been sought against Mishra and five others, including senior police personnel, on the basis of these assertions.

What did the magistrate court say earlier?

In his 1 April order, Magistrate Vaibhav Chaurasiya had cast sharp doubt on aspects of the Delhi Police’s broader inquiry into the riots. Kapil Mishra criticised what he described as speculative reasoning and unsupported links drawn by investigators to assert that anti-CAA protests were a pre-planned conspiracy.

The magistrate noted, “Once these flaws are outlined, therefore the theory goes off and so does the lens with which prosecution seeks to interpret the facts.”

He further observed that several of the police narrative’s core assumptions — including suggestions regarding the strategic placement of women protestors — could be read differently: “Several of Delhi Police’s interpretations, including the argument that women were put in front of the anti-CAA protests so that the police would practise restraint and mass-scale violence could be executed, can be interpreted otherwise.”

Why was the order challenged?

Both Kapil Mishra and the Delhi Police filed appeals against the magistrate’s directive. On April 9, the sessions court granted an interim stay on the order, pausing further investigation based on Ilyas’s complaint.

The Delhi Court has now dismissed the directive altogether, bringing a close — at least for the moment — to attempts to initiate a fresh probe into Mishra’s alleged involvement.

What happens next?

With the sessions court setting aside the trial court order, there is currently no active direction to register an FIR or reopen the inquiry into the allegations against Mishra.

However, the complainant retains the right to approach the high court if he chooses to challenge Monday’s ruling.