Delhi Court Acquits BJP MLA Om Prakash Sharma In 2016 Patiala House Court Assault Case, Says Complainant Made Material Improvement In Statements
A Delhi Court has acquitted BJP MLA Om Prakash Sharma and Delhi MLA Tarvinder Singh Marwah in the 2016 Patiala House assault case alleging that they caused simple hurt and wrongfully restrained complainant and CPI member Ameeque Jamai. Specific allegation against Sharma was that he criminally intimidated Jamai while threatening to kill him.Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra...
A Delhi Court has acquitted BJP MLA Om Prakash Sharma and Delhi MLA Tarvinder Singh Marwah in the 2016 Patiala House assault case alleging that they caused simple hurt and wrongfully restrained complainant and CPI member Ameeque Jamai. Specific allegation against Sharma was that he criminally intimidated Jamai while threatening to kill him.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra Kumar Pandey acquitted the two over lack of proof and evidences in the matter.
Know The Controversy
It was the complainant's case that in February 2016, while he was present in the Court premises as JNU Students including Kanhiya Kumar were to be produced, a group of lawyers wearing black and white clothes started allegedly manhandling a Professor and other journalists which lead to their beating.
It was also alleged that they were chanting slogans such as Bharat Mata Ki Jai and Bhartiya Janta Party Jindabad.
The complainant further deposed that Om Prakash Sharma alongwith Marwah, accompanied by a mob, attacked him when he was giving news bytes to media. On trying to escape from the spot, the mob followed him and pushed him down the road.
He further stated that the mob started giving fist blows and kicks on his head, back, face and chest and that Sharma threatened the witness for standing with the justice for Rohit Vamula campaign.
Court Observations: 'Contrarictory And Vague Statements By Complainant'
The Court opined that although Sharma was known to the complainant since the year 2013-2014, however, he made contradictory, vague statement and made improvements in all three statements recorded during the investigation and trial.
"No other eye witness of the incident was associated in the investigation or produced in the trial and no valid explanation was offered by the prosecution or by the investigating agency," the Court said.
The Court concluded thus:
"The Court is of the considered view that it is not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma was present alongwith the mob which allegedly beaten up the complainant Ameeque Jamai. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma had caused any injury of any nature to the complainant Ameeque Jamai. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma threatened to kill the complainant. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma was the part of the mob which allegedly wrongfully restrained the complainant."