Delhi Riots: Court Frames Charges Against 9 Men, Rejects Argument Regarding Credibility Of Police Officials' For Being 'Stock Witnesses' In Similar Cases

Rejecting the argument regarding credibility of statements given by two police officials for being 'stock witnesses' in 12 other similar cases, a Delhi Court has framed charges against 9 men in connection with a North East Delhi riots case.

Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhat framed charges against Mohd. Shahnawaz, Mohd Shoaib, Shahrukh, Rashid, Azad, Parvez, Mohd. Faizal and Rashid @ Monu under sec. 147, 148, 436, 454/392, 452, 427, 506 and 149 of the IPC.

The case of the prosecution was that the accused persons after constituting an unlawful assembly, resorted to violence, looted as well as set ablaze the properties belonging to members of Hindu community city's Shiv Vihar area.

The said FIR was registered on the complaint of one Narender Kumar alleging that a mob consisting of about 1500 rioters armed with lethal weapons reached his house and started damaging the shops on the ground floor of the house.

Thereafter about 50­ to 60 rioters allegedly climbed to the upper floor of the house and threatened him and his family members to leave the house otherwise they would be burnt alive.

The Court rejected the argument put forth on behalf of the accused persons that the statements of the two police officials could not be considered for the reason that were been cited as witnesses in 12 riot related cases. According to the accused, it was contended that the police officials were stock witnesses for the police.

The Court said that it was possible that more than one incidents of crime, which had taken place in same locality, happened before the eyes of a police official who had been deputed to that particular area for maintaining law & order. Hence, there was no illegality in citing that police official as a witness in other similar cases.

"Only caution would be that the version of the incident given by that police official needs to be scrutinized minutely in every such case in order to see as to whether or not the same is prima­ facie probable and reliable," the Judge added.

It was also observed that the narration of the incident given by the two police officials nowhere reflected that they were not present at the spot of incident or were planted or stock witnesses.

"Therefore, it cannot be said that they had no opportunity or occasion to be at the spot of incident on 24.02.2020 and to witness the incident. Their statements prima ­facie appear to be probable and reliable at this stage," the Court added.

On the aspect of the delay in recording of their statements, the Court was convinced with the submissions of the prosecution that the delay had occasioned on account of peculiar circumstances.

It was pointed out that large number of complaints were received in the police station in the aftermath of the riots and the police officials were busy in examining the complaints and at the same time in maintaining peace in the area as well as in instilling sense of safety amongst the victims.

"Therefore, it would be against the demands of justice to discard the statements of these two witnesses at this very stage when the charges are to be decided against the accused. The truthfulness or otherwise of their statements can be assessed during the trial of the case," the Judge said.

The Court therefore concluded that the record prima­facie disclosed the commission of offences of rioting, looting and setting ablaze the shop of the complainant by the accused persons.

"Thus, there is no escape from the conclusion at this stage that the accused were members of unlawful assembly, the object of which was to cause riots, vandalism and destruction of the properties etc. No case for their discharge is made out. It is, thus, held that the charges u/s 147/ 148/ 436/ 454/ 392/452/ 427/ 506 IPC r/w Section 149 IPC are liable to framed against all the accused," the Court said.

Title: State Vs. Mohd. Shahnawaz @ Shanu @ Ansari etc.

Click Here To Read Order