'Delay In Lodging FIR Justified As There Was Atmosphere Of Terror, Trauma': Delhi Court Frames Charges Against 4 In Riots Case

A Delhi Court on Tuesday framed charges of rioting and unlawful assembly against four men in a case concerning the North East Delhi riots. It also observed that the delay of five days in reporting the incident to the police is justified as there was an atmosphere of terror and trauma after the riots erupted in the national capital.

Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt framed charges under 147 (Punishment for rioting), 148 (Punishment for rioting ), 149 (unlawful assembly), 392 (Punishment for robbery ), 427 (Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees), 436 (Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house) and 454 (Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence) against Mohd. Shahnawaz, Mohd. Shoaib, Shahrukh and Rashid.

"There was an atmosphere of terror and trauma which prevailed in the area for several days even after these riots. In these circumstances, the delay of five days in reporting the incident to the police station would appear justified to any prudent person and cannot be considered fatal to the prosecution case," the Court observed.

It was the prosecution's case that a complaint was received by the police from one Ram Charan Sharma wherein it was alleged that the two shops owned by him were looted, damaged and burnt by rioters. An FIR was therefore registered in the matter.

According to the prosecution, in the CCTV footage, accused Mohd. Shoiab and Sharukh were seen holding wooden rods in their hands and resorting to vandalism and stone pelting.

It was also alleged that after the incident, the rioters had damaged the other CCTV cameras installed around the incident spot and therefore, no other CCTV footage video clip could be obtained.

It was therefore submitted that according to the statements of three public witnesses coupled with the statements of two police witnesses, it was evident that the four accused were part of the riotous mob.

On the other hand, the counsel appearing for accused persons submitted that there was an unexplained delay of five days in lodging the FIR and delay of more than a month in recording the statements of the eye witnesses and therefore, their version cannot be believed.

"It is true that there is a delay of about five days in lodging the complaint and registration of the FIR in this case. However, it is to be noted here that this case is an offshoot communal riots which had erupted in North­East Delhi on 24.02.2020 and continued till 26.02.2020 when the situation was brought under control by the police and para­military force. There had been instances of rioting, killing, looting, vandalizing, setting ablaze movable and immovable properties etc. by the members of each community against each other," the Court said.

The Court also added that the eye witnesses' account cannot be ignored merely for the reason that their statements were recorded after a delay of about more than one month from the date of incident.

"Keeping these circumstances, in view, it cannot be said that the delay in recording the statements of these witnesses was intentional or contumacious and therefore, the accused cannot claim discharge in this case merely on this score," the judge said.

Case Title: State v. Mohd. Shahnawaz & Ors.

Click Here To Read Order