https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/extra-judicial-commissions-creating-false-narratives-around-2020-delhi-riots-central-government-to-delhi-high-court The affidavit dated September 19, 2022 was filed by the Centre in support of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking quashing of different reports prepared by the Delhi Minorities Commission (DMC), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Citizens and Lawyers Initiative on the Delhi Riots of 2020.
In the plea, one Dharmesh Sharma has stated that his family used to run a school in Delhi's Mustafabad area, which was burned down during the riots. He said that the reports published by the DMC as well as other organisations are biased and impede the due process of law. In its response, the Centre has said that the DMC report is not only without jurisdiction, but also 'fake', and has been engineered by people with 'oblique and extraneous motives'. With regard to other reports, the government said that they abrogate fair trial and should be declared non-est so that they are not relied upon by any judicial forum, including courts.
Comment on Whatsapp: I suppose we will be discussing this today. We have to plea that in the age of whats app and Instagram, and fake news, one of the democratic duties of the people, is to learn "how to read" all such reports and understand them. It is unbecoming of "state" to say that since abc is influencing people, and somebody is "motivated" that either this motivation is illegitimate or that people who get follow these reports are "sheep". In fact it is the duty of State to ensure that in a regime of public news production, State should enable persons to get all points of view, and that all arms of the State should take cognizance of these reports, and when they are serious allegations which deal with Fundamental rights and Human Rights, the agencies concerned enquiry into each such allegation and present their findings before the executive and file FIRS before the courts, instead of declaring them "non-est"
All reports of inquiry should be seen (much like the rhetoric of advocate saying that they seek to "assist the Court:, ) that they are infact "assisting" the law enforcement machinery. This also relates to the please taken by govt on "public Order".. Does not public order mean just order? There must be several texts on this.