Delhi riots case: Supreme Court stays HC order granting Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita access to probe documents
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 20, 2026) stayed a Delhi High Court order permitting Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita to inspect documents and other
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 20, 2026) stayed a Delhi High Court order permitting Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita to inspect documents and other material collected during the investigation but not relied upon by the Delhi Police in its chargesheet in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. The interim order came on an appeal filed by the Delhi Police against the High Court’s June 5 judgment, which had allowed Ms. Kalita to inspect the police malkhana containing the case property, including material seized during the investigation but neither relied upon by the investigating agency nor filed along with the chargesheet. The High Court had also vacated its 2024 stay on the trial court proceedings, allowing the process of framing charges to resume. A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M. Pancholi issued notice on the Delhi Police’s appeal and stayed the operation of the High Court’s order. “In the meantime, there shall be a stay of the impugned order,” the Bench directed. Appearing for Ms. Kalita, advocate Adit S. Pujari submitted that the High Court’s decision was consistent with the Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Sarla Gupta v. Enforcement Directorate, which held that an accused prosecuted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is entitled to obtain the list of documents not relied upon by the investigating agency while filing the chargesheet.
He further contended that the prosecution alleged Ms. Kalita had indulged in stone-pelting during the anti-CAA protests, even though the demonstrations had been videographed in their entirety. According to him, access to the footage would establish that the protest had remained peaceful and refute the allegations levelled by the police. “If the videos show I am protesting, and they have not given me where, is the question of saying I was throwing stones? If I am sitting peacefully, I should be discharged. Why should I go through the trial?” he said. Opposing the plea, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Delhi Police, submitted that Ms. Kalita was not entitled to inspect any material beyond the chargesheet before charges were framed. “They can’t ask for any other document. What is the purpose of inspection at this stage?” Mr. Raju argued. The Bench agreed with the submission, observing that permitting such inspection at this stage would only delay the trial further. Referring to the connected proceedings involving co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Justice Kumar remarked, “This is the same Gulfisha Fatima case. In this way, you will not conclude the trial in the next 10 years, and you say there is a delay in the trial.
The BriefWire