Delhi High Court Relaxes 2020 Riots Case Accused's Bail Condition, Permits Him To Travel Outside The City To Attend Sister's Wedding

Relaxing a condition imposed in a 2021 order while granting bail to a man booked in connection with the murder of Head Constable Ratan Lal during the 2020 North-East riots, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (October 29) permitted the man to attend his sister's wedding in Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh. 

On September 3, 2021 the high court had granted bail to Shadab Ahmad, booked in FIR No. 60/2020 registered at Dayalpur police station subject to certain conditions. One of the bail conditions (condition (b)) mandated that Ahmad "shall not leave NCT of Delhi" without the high court's prior permission. Ahmad moved the high court seeking relaxation of this condition till November 5, which would enable him to attend his real sister's wedding. 

During the hearing today, senior advocate Rebecca John appearing for Ahmad submitted before a single judge bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri that Ahmad who is also booked in FIR 59/2020–registered under provisions of IPC and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) pertaining to the riots, had been granted interim bail by the trial court.

John said, "I was granted interim bail from October 29, 2024-November 5, 2024 to attend the wedding of my sister in Bijnor. Pursuant to that I have come out on interim bail. This is one of the riots cases. I was an accused in three cases. Your lordship may take it that in FIR 60 of 2020 this Hon'ble court granted me bail. In FIR 136/2020 I was granted bail by the trial court. I'm in custody in FIR 59/2020 which is the UAPA case. The UAPA court granted me bail, in the other two I'm already on bail. We then realised that in the order passed by this court...in the bail order, there is a condition that I cannot travel outside Delhi. The wedding is in Bijnor. Although I was granted bail in that FIR I could not come out because Im an accused in the UAPA FIR. Now UAPA Court has granted me interim bail without that condition". 

Meanwhile Special Public Prosecutor Ashish Datta submitted that the State had no problem if the court relaxes the bail condition (b) mentioned in the 2021 order, till November 5. 

Taking note of the same, the high court permitted the relaxation of Ahmad's bail condition till November 5. 

Background

The FIR (60/2020) was registered on the complaint of a Constable stating that on February 24, 2020, when was on the law-and-order arrangement duty with other staff members at Chand Bagh area. The FIR stated that protesters had mobilized near the area and were moving towards the Main Wazirabad Road; when they assembled near road, it was stated that the Complainant and other police officers attempted to convince the protestors to not move towards the road. It was alleged that the protestors were carrying sticks, baseball sticks, iron rods and stones

However, it was alleged, that despite being warned by the police officers present there, some people amongst the crowd started pelting stones at the police officials, and beat them as well as other passersby with the weapons that had been hidden. 

It was alleged that the Complainant received an injury on his right elbow and right hand due to a huge stone. It was further alleged that the crowd even snatched tear gas balls and lathis from the police, and started beating them with it. It was alleged that the then ACP Gokalpuri, Head Constable (HC) Ratan Lal and DCP Shahdara were also beaten with sticks and stones, due to which they fell down and "suffered grievous head injuries".

Thereafter, all the injured persons were taken to hospital, where it was found that HC Ratan Lal had succumbed to a bullet injury,

The chargesheet alleged that Shadab Ahmad is one of the main conspirators and had played a vital role in instigating the protestors at Chand Bagh. The chargesheet stated that Ahmad was entrusted with the job of maintaining the tent and the stage at the protest site, and that he would, along with the other accused, "deliver hate speeches and instigate the public to be violent". 

At the outset, a coordinate single judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad had in its 2021 order observed that applicability of Section 149 IPC, specifically read with Section 302, cannot be done on the basis of vague evidence and general allegations.

"When there is a crowd involved, at the juncture of grant or denial of bail, the Court must hesitate before arriving at the conclusion that every member of the unlawful assembly inhabits a common intention to accomplish the unlawful common object," added the Court.

The court had further said that the veracity of the statements of the public witnesses and police officials is not to be delved into at this juncture and is a matter of trial. In view of this the court had then said that the "same is not sufficient to justify the continued incarceration of the Petitioner herein". The court had further noted that Ahmad had been in jail for 16 months. 

"Additionally, merely being one of the organisers of the protest as well as being in touch with others who participated in the protest is also not sufficient enough to justify the contention that the Petitioner was involved in the pre-planning of the alleged incident. It is to be noted that the right to protest and express dissent is a right which occupies a fundamental stature in a democratic polity, and therefore, the sole act of protesting should not be employed as a weapon to justify the incarceration of those who are exercising this right," the court had further observed. 

Case title: Shadab Ahmad v State of NCT of Delhi