Delhi court refuses to pass direction to lodge FIR against Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge
New Delhi: The Delhi Court has declined to order that Congress Chief Mallikarjun Kharge be the subject of a formal complaint. Nonetheless, the complaint claiming hate speech against the BJP and RSS during an electoral rally in Karnataka in April 2023 has been taken up by the court.
After hearing the complainant’s attorney’s arguments and taking into account the Delhi Police Action Taken Report (ATR), Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Chatinder Singh declined to issue instructions for filing a formal complaint.
According to the court, the complainant has all the proof, and the culprit has already been recognized. A FIR is not required.
Therefore, in this instance, the police do not need to conduct an inquiry under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. In a ruling issued on December 9, JMFC Chatinder Singh said, “The application is hereby dismissed.”
Nonetheless, the court has acknowledged the complaint that RSS member Advocate Ravinder Gupta submitted.
According to JMFC, “However, the cognizance of the complaint is taken.”
The complainant is free to lead pre-summoning evidence (PSE), the court ruled. The provision of section 202 Cr.PC may be used to put up for PSE on March 27, 2025, in the event that a later inquiry is necessary regarding any disputed facts.
Through attorney Gagan Gandhi, the complainant submitted a complaint.
According to the court, Kharge is accused of making derogatory statements against the BJP and RSS during an election rally. The complaint further claims that Kharge feels wronged since he is an RSS member.
There is no need for recovery or the collection of any such material evidence, which can only be done by the police, since the complainant already has all the information on the offender and the witnesses who will be questioned.
“The true test to use the discretionary power to order an investigation by police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is not whether any cognizable offence is committed or not, but whether an investigation by police agency is required or not,” the judge said.
According to the court, the complainant has all the relevant information in this instance; thus the police don’t need to conduct a complicated or technical investigation.
The court said that it may use Section 202 Cr.P.C. for that purpose if it later determines that a police inquiry is warranted.Given the facts and circumstances of this complaint, Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. does not need to be invoked in order to provide instructions to file a formal complaint against the accused individuals.
Since the identification of the suspected accused has been established, there is no need to file a formal complaint. Since the complainant is completely aware of the facts, no information needs to be uncovered.
It is not required to question the accused in custody.
The complainant had easy access to the material, the court said, and no police support was needed to collect it.
“The facts of the case are not such that would warrant a detailed and complex investigation to be carried out by the State Agency,” the judge said.
On April 27, 2023, the accused allegedly delivered a hate speech during an election rally in Naregal, Gadag, Karnataka, where they made a derogatory statement against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The complaint further claims that the accused subsequently indicated at other electoral rallies that same day that his remarks were directed at the BJP and RSS rather than the prime minister. Additionally, the complainant feels defamed since he is an enthusiastic member and devoted follower of RSS.
The complainant had requested that a formal complaint be filed against the accused individuals. Police (PS) Station Subzi Mandi submitted the Action Taken Report (ATR) that the court had requested.
The investigating officer (IO) argued that no crime was committed within PS Subzi Mandi’s jurisdiction and that the speech was spoken during an election rally in Naregal, Karnataka.
