Delhi Court Calls For Sensitization Of Subordinate Police Officials, Expeditious Trial Of Riots Cases

A Delhi Court has recently directed the city Police to ensure sensitization of subordinate police officials and expeditious trial of cases concerning the North East Delhi riots.

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramesh Kumar, North East district of the Karkardooma Court passed the order while setting aside an order passed by the CMM which had imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on Delhi Police.

The CMM had observed that the delay in moving an application regarding segregation of complaint in a riots case caused undue harassment to the accused persons, two of whom were in judicial custody.

Observing that repeated directions in riots cases had fallen on deaf ears of the Senior police officials, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Arun Kumar Garg had, vide order dated October 12, directed the Commissioner of Police to furnish a detailed report regarding steps taken by him to ensure proper investigation or prosecution of riots cases and their expeditious trial.

Challenging the said order, a revision petition was filed by SHO, Police Station, Bhajanpura.

While setting aside the said order including directions given to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, and Secretary (Home), Union of India, the Court ordered thus:

"However, concerned DCP is directed to ensure expeditious trial of the cases pertaining to the North East riots and sensitize subordinates police officials, so that, there is no delay in trial of cases pertaining to North East riots. With these observation, the revision petition is disposed of."

It added:

"In the present matter, it is clear that the ld. Trial Court granted adjournment for compliance of the order of the ld. Sessions Court, however, cost was imposed on the State on account of delay in moving appropriate application by the IO. Since, IO was supposed to comply with the direction of the ld. Sessions Court, I am of the considered opinion that the imposition of cost of Rs.25,000/­ is not justified."

About The Order Passed By CMM

The development came after the CMM perused the status report filed by the IO wherein a prayer was made for granting permission and further time for investigation of the matter and also to investigate the complaint of one Faizan Khan separately.

During they course of hearing, the SPP had submitted that further investigation in the matter was necessary in terms of an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge dated September 10, 2021 wherein it was highlighted that the investigation qua complaint of the complainant namely Akil Ahmad pertaining to the incident could not have been clubbed with the present FIR.

"However, the status report filed by the IO and forwarded by SHO PS Bhajan Pura, tells a different story in as much as it has been stated by the IO that all the complaints received in the present case except the complaint of original complainant Faizan Khan are in respect of the same place of incident,whereas, there is no mention of any specific date and time of incident at the shop of Faizan Khan and hence the same has been segregated. There is no whisper in the aforesaid report regarding the segregation of complaint of complainant Akil Ahmad," the Court had recorded in the order.

The Court was also informed that no case diary was written in the matter after 10.09.2021 and that the supplementary charge sheet qua the complaint of Faizan Khan shall be filed within a period of 3 days.

On this, the Court had said:

"In view of inconsistency in the submissions made on behalf of IO as well as Ld. SPP regarding segregation of investigation qua the complaint of Akil Ahmad on the one hand and of the complainant Faizan Khan on the other, it is apparent that the prosecution is still not sure as to how it should go about further investigation/prosecution in the present case and in the only purpose for seeking permission for further investigation is to derail the further proceedings in the present case."

It had added:

"In the meantime, the request of IO for segregation of the complaint qua the accused Faizan Khan and for further investigation in the present case is allowed,however, considering the delay in moving the present application leading to undue harassment of the accused persons, two of whom are still running in JC, the said request is allowed subject to adjournment cost of Rs. 25,000/­ to be paid by the State to all the seven accused in equal proportion on the next date."

The Court had also directed the Secretary (Home) Union of India to order an inquiry to fix the responsibility for imposition of the cost and deduction of the same from the salary of the responsible officer.

Case Title: SHO PS Bhajanpura Vs. Neeraj @ Kashi & Ors.

Click Here To Read Order