Delhi Riots- "Fail To Understand Why Police Officer Didn't Call PCR/Made DD Entry Despite Having Good Understanding Of Law & Order": Delhi HC Grants Bail To 4
This Court fails to understand as to why despite having a good understanding of law and order, a police official who is witness to riots would neither call PCR nor will make a DD entry in this regard: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (16th March) granted bail to four men arrested in connection with the 2020 North-East Delhi Riots, noting the lack of evidence like CCTV footage, video clips or photos to connect them with the incident of rioting. The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait was hearing the bail pleas of accused- Liyakat Ali, Arshad Qayyum, Gulfam and Irshad, accused...
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (16th March) granted bail to four men arrested in connection with the 2020 North-East Delhi Riots, noting the lack of evidence like CCTV footage, video clips or photos to connect them with the incident of rioting.
The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait was hearing the bail pleas of accused- Liyakat Ali, Arshad Qayyum, Gulfam and Irshad, accused of rioting, promoting enmity and disharmony by rioting, burning vehicles and committing robbery at a marriage ceremony in Khajuri Khas's Main Karawal Nagar area in Feb last year.
[NOTE: In the charge sheet filed against all the Bail Applicants, they have been booked for the offences under Sections under Sections 109/114/147/148/149/ 153A/323/392/395/ 427/436/ 454/505/120B/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act.]
The complainant in the matter had alleged that the preparations for the marriage of his brother's daughter was going on and a mob, which was present on the roof of suspended councillor and the then AAP leader Tahir Hussain were pelting stones and petrol bombs on the passers-by, the complainant alleged.
It was further alleged that a few of them broke open the shutter of the parking lot of Bharat Vatika and robbed the inmates and also burnt one of the parked vehicles and damaged the motorcycle of the complainant.
Court's observations
The Court, at the outset, noted that in the FIR in question, none of the petitioners have been particularly named and rather, the complainant had specifically stated that he can identify a few of the rioters.
The Court also took into account the fact that on 24th February 2020 but the FIR in question was registered on 27th February 2020 and that the testimony of eyewitnesses, namely, Pradeep Verma, Surender Singh and Rajbir Singh Yadav under Section 161 Cr.P.C. had been recorded on 14th March 2020 and none of them neither made any PCR call nor any DD entry was made.
To this, the Court questioned the police officials and remarked,
"This Court fails to understand as to why despite having good understanding of law and order, a police official who is witness to riots would neither call PCR nor will make a DD entry in this regard."
Besides, the Court observed that the call detail record of prime accused Tahir Hussain does not match with those of petitioners and that, there is no evidence against the petitioners such as CCTV footage, video clip or photo to connect the petitioners with the incident in question and nothing incriminating has been recovered from their possession.
Significantly, ordering that they be released on bail, the Court said,
"In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, prima facie I am of the opinion that petitioners cannot be made to languish behind bars for a longer time and the veracity of allegations levelled against them can be tested during trial."
Accordingly, petitioners were directed to be released on bail forthwith in the FIR case upon their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each, with one surety each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Read Order