Delhi Riots: Court Frames Charges Against 49 Men For Allegedly Looting And Putting Car Showroom On Fire

A Delhi Court yesterday framed charges against 49 men for allegedly looting and putting on fire a car showroom during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala of Karkardooma Courts framed charges against Rafat, Imran, Dildar, Faraz, Ayub, Saleem Malik, Salim Khan, Arif, Mohd. Mansoor, Shahnawaz, Sadiq, Shadab, Irshad Ali, Mansoor, Kashif, Wasif, Shamim, Khalid, Salman, Shibu Khan, Hamid, Zuber Alam, Athar Khan, Shakeel Ahmed, Jaan Mohammed, Asif Javed, Saqib, Ubesh, Bablu, Gulzar, Irfan, Dildar, Imran, Asrar, Siraj Ahmed, Mohd. Ahsan, Firoz, Sharif, Faizan, Akeel, Mohd. Shakir, Mohd. Nadeem, Abdul Razak, Zakir Malik, Tazuddin, Haseen Ahmed, Sabir and Suhail Sultan.

Charges have been framed for the offences punishable under sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapon), 427 (mischief), 435 (mischief by fire), 436 (punishment for mischief by fire), 450 (house trespass), 149 (unlawful assembly) and 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

However, the court discharged one Mohd. Aftab as there was no concrete evidence of his identification in the mob.

FIR 136/2020 was registered at Dayalpur police station on the written complaint of one Rajesh Singh, the General Manager of Fair Deal Maruti Car Showroom, alleging that various articles in the showroom were set on fire by a mob which caused a loss of Rs. 3.5 Crores to him.

While framing charges, the court said that the evidence on the record prima facie showed that accused persons were part of an unlawful assembly which was present there at the spot and which came into action with common object to go on rampage and damage the properties.

“Allegedly, all accused persons were outside their home on the road and were part of unlawful assembly in order to achieve aforesaid common object, in violation of proclamation made u/s. 144 Cr.P.C. This proclamation was made for all the public; hence, it was not required to be served upon each person in North East Delhi,” the court said.

However, it found that no case was made out for existence of a criminal conspiracy between the accused persons.

“The mob became violent subsequently and started indulging into riot, vandalism and arson. From these circumstances, the element of prior agreement among the accused persons and others, cannot be inferred,” the court said.