Delhi High Court refuses to recall order to Government to disburse Rs 21 crore to ’20 riot victims

The riot victims have submitted claims of approximately Rs 153.69 crore, against which the NEDRCC has recommended the disbursal of about Rs 21.71 crore.

North East Delhi RiotsThe compensation was recommended by the North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission (NEDRCC), which was notified by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government in April 2020. (Express archive)

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to recall its January 2025 order in which the court had directed the Delhi government to disburse Rs 21 crore to the victims of the communal violence that took place in North East Delhi in February 2020.

The compensation was recommended by the North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission (NEDRCC), which was notified by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government in April 2020.

The government has opposed the HC’s directive, relying on a Supreme Court judgment that it says “contemplates that the liability (for loss of life or property and injury) is to be borne by the actual perpetrators and organisers (of the violence)”.

However, the government informed the HC on Monday that it had “not yet” put in place a mechanism to recover money from the accused or perpetrators of the violence. At least 53 people, most of them Muslims, were killed and more than 700 were injured in the riots that began on February 23, 2020.

“[The SC’s] judgment (Re: Destruction of Public & Private Properties vs. State of AP and Ors, April 16, 2009) says that the compensation will be given by the persons who have caused the destruction, and not by the government, certainly,” standing counsel for Delhi government Sameer Vashisht told a division Bench of High Court Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia on Monday.

The court responded orally: “Under the earlier judgments of the Supreme Court, you have to recover the amount from those who are responsible [for the damage]. Have you recovered that amount? They (victims) can’t go to them (perpetrators) to recover the amount, can they?… You have to evolve a mechanism for realisation of the damage caused by such persons; is that mechanism in place?”

Vashisht responded that trials of the accused were “still continuing”. On whether the mechanism for the realisation of damages had been set up, Vashisht said, “Not yet”.

Story continues below this ad

On January 15, 2025, following a request by the victims, a single judge Bench of the court had directed the government to disburse the compensation. The AAP government, which was in power at the time, did not oppose the request.

The current government, which took over in February last year, has since claimed that the proxy counsel who appeared on behalf of the standing counsel when the order was passed had given the government’s ‘No Objection’ “inadvertently” and “without any instructions or authorisation from either the standing counsel or the concerned departmental authorities”.

In September 2025, the Delhi government moved an application before the single judge seeking a recall of the court’s January 15, 2025 order.

The single judge dismissed the recall application on May 7 this year. The court recorded that the government’s justification of “inadvertence does not inspire confidence”, and noted there was “delay/latches” in even moving the recall application, which was “demonstrative of the lack of merit thereof”.

Story continues below this ad

On May 29, the government appealed against the May 7 order, and asked for the January 15, 2025 order to be recalled.

Opposing the government’s plea for recall of the order, counsel for victims Chirayu Jain argued on Monday: “In May 2025, the law department gives an opinion that to avoid the contempt proceedings, a review application may be filed. The recall application in September 2025 was filed just to avoid contempt proceedings… Such an appeal should not be entertained for the reason that this has been filed to avoid contempt, just because there has been a change of government in February that the entire stance has changed.”

The division Bench disposed of the state’s appeal without interfering with the January 2025 and May 7 orders. But it granted the state liberty to move an application challenging the January 2025 order.

The riot victims have submitted claims of approximately Rs 153.69 crore, against which the NEDRCC has recommended the disbursal of about Rs 21.71 crore.

Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More

 

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments