2010 Bareilly Riots Case: After HC expunge order, trial taken away from Addl Session Judge court

“The district judge has decided to hear the case. The documents related to the case have been summoned from the court where the matter was pending,” said District Government Counsel (Bareilly) SK Pathak.

The court has fixed April 1 as the next date for the hearing.

The case dates back to the March 2010 riot over the Barawafat procession route in Bareilly in which several persons were injured and vehicles and shops were damaged. Initially, the police had arrested Barelvi sect cleric Tauqeer Raza Khan among others but did not file chargesheet against him.

On March 5, the trial court issued summons against the cleric and observed that those in positions of power should be “religious persons” and cited UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath as an example. The court observed that if a religious person heads the state, he gets good results, as propounded by the philosopher Plato in his concept of the ‘Philosopher King’ in his book, Republic.

“Those wielding power (satta ka pramukh) should be a religious person, because the life of a religious person is not of enjoyment but of sacrifice and dedication. For example, the Siddha Peeth Gorakhnath Temple’s peethadheeshwar Mahant Baba Yogi Adityanath, who is presently Chief Minister of our Uttar Pradesh, has proved the above concept to be true.”

When Tauqeer Raza Khan did not appear before the court on the fixed date, the court issued a non-bailable warrant against him.

While hearing a petition by Tauqeer Raza against the Bareilly additional sessions judge’s order, the Allahabad High Court on March 19 said, “… the trial court, while passing the impugned order, mentioned certain unwarranted expressions containing political overtones and personal views. Besides this, he has also shared his personal experiences in the said order, which is not at all required while passing judicial order. It is not expected from the judicial officer to express or depict his personal or pre-conceived notions or inclinations in the matter. The judicial order is meant for public consumption and such type of order is likely to be misconstrued by the masses. It is expected from a judicial officer that he should use a very guarded expression while focusing upon the issue in hand and should not use any observation which are tangent or alien to the core issue.”