'Highly Irresponsible, Patently False': Court Expresses Displeasure On Advocate's Submission That Delhi Riots Were Political, Targeted Muslim Community

A Delhi Court recently observed that the police appears to have done its job with utmost integrity while investigating the cases related to Delhi riots and that the investigations are certainly not on communal lines.

Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhat expressed its displeasure on the submissions made by Advocate Mehmood Pracha, claiming that the riots were not communal and had in fact taken place at the instance of certain political vested interests, thereby targeting members of the Muslim community.

The Judge noted that the said submissions were highly irresponsible, patently false and were not in good taste.

"These submissions of the Ld. Counsel are certainly not in good taste. These are noted with immense disgust, repugnance and strong disapproval. Ld.Counsel for the applicant has not pointed out any material on record to substantiate his claim that the riots were not communal in nature or were the handiwork of any political party," the judge noted.

The Court was hearing a regular bail plea filed by one Arif in FIR 59/2020 registered at Karawal Nagar police station. The FIR concerned murder of one Alok Tiwari who had sustained several blunt and sharp injuries during the riots. 

The post mortem report stated that the deceased had received 13 injuries by sharp edged and blunt objects and cause of his death was "shock as a result of ante­mortem injury to the brain caused by blunt force impact".

Pracha had submitted that only the persons belonging to Muslim Community like Arif were targeted by the police in the aftermath of the riots and were arraigned in false criminal cases.

"It is the Ld.Counsel himself, who is now painting the entire Delhi Police with a communal brush by saying that the criminal cases related to the riots have been fastened upon the members of Muslim Community alone. The statement of Ld.Counsel is not only highly irresponsible but also patently false," the Court said.

While making the said observations, the Court also noted that members of both the communities namely Hindu and Muslim communities were arraigned as accused and were charge­sheeted by the police.

Moreover, in some cases there are witnesses belonging to Hindu Community cited against the accused belonging to the same community and witnesses belonging to Muslim community cited against the accused belonging to the same community.

"The police appears to have done its job with utmost integrity and certainly not on communal lines. May be some lapses have been occurred during the investigation of these cases related to the riots but even those lapses also do not give any slightest indication that the investigation was not fair and impartial or that it was on communal lines," the Court said.

It added:

"Ld.Counsel would be well advised to desist from making such irresponsible, uncalled for and patently false submissions. The cases before this court are very serious and sensitive in nature and required to be dealt with in a professional manner and without any communal taint."

The Court also rejected the argument made by Pracha saying that the charge­sheet in the matter was nothing but only a bunch of papers filed pursuant to partial investigation and therefore, could not be treated as a complete charge­sheet.

"It is evident that the Ld. Counsel is himself not sure in his mind about the legality of this argument and for this reason he did not approach this Court for default bail to the applicant u/s 167 Cr. P.C and instead has filed the instant application for regular bail u/s 439 IPC. Moreover, the submissions of the Ld. Counsel that the charge­sheet is only a bunch of papers is again distasteful, to say least," the Court said.

The Court added that the FIR related to to the killing of a person by riotous mob and only few persons amongst that mob were identified against whom the charge­sheet was filed. Therefore, the judge said that it was the duty of the police to continue further investigation so as to identify all the remaining rioters and bring them to book.

On the merits of the case, the Court noted that the two statements of witnesses prima facie showed Arif's presence at the crime spot.

"Moreover, the CDR location of the applicant also has been found near the crime spot on the date of the incident and at the time of incident. The fact that the applicant refused to take part in Test Identification parade (TIP) after his arrest also weighs against him at this stage and adverse inference is liable to be drawn against him in the matter," the judge added.

Accordingly, the Court rejected the bail plea.

Case Title: State vs Arif

Click Here To Read Order