[Delhi Riots] FSL Report Doesn't Support Prosecution's Case, His Presence At The Spot Doubtful: Delhi HC Grants Bail To Riots Accused [Read Order]

The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait observed that it could not be established that the petitioner was present on the spot at the time when the incident took place in the case against the Accused.

It may be noted that Yogesh was arrested on 18th March, 2020 in connection with the FIR No.97/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/302/153- A/436/505/34/120B IPC registered at police station Karawal Nagar, Delhi.

The accused was charged with the offence of being actively involved and instigating a mob leading to the murder of a person belonging to a different community.

Arguments put forth

The SPP opposed the petition by stating that deceased Aftab's body was recovered from the drain in a highly decomposed state on 01.03.2020.

Further, in the Post Mortem report, it was stated that the deceased was having 2 bullet injuries and 17 lacerated wounds on his body, thus, it was argued that he was killed in a brutal manner.

Further, it was submitted that both FIR No. 62/2020 and 97/2020 pertain to incidents similar in nature. The petitioner was arrested in FIR No. 62/2020 and he himself disclosed his involvement in the present case.

In addition to the above, it was contended that witnesses Mohd Firoz and Fahim were shown photographs of various suspects and they clearly identified Yogesh (petitioner), Lakhpat and Kuldeep in their Statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC.

Court's Analysis and Order

The Court acknowledged the fact that petitioner's Regular Bail Application No. 2053/2020 was dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 31.08.2020 by recording that petitioner had played an active role in the commission of offence and recovery was effected from him (Katta) and because of his involvement in another FIR No. 97/2020 (present FIR )of similar nature.

Further, the Court noted that Pursuant to the directions passed by the Court, the results of FSL and DVRs were placed on the record.

In this context, the Court said,

"As per the result of FSL report, three recovered bullets from the dead body of the deceased were not fired from the country-made pistols recovered from the accused persons of FIR No. 62/2020."

The Court further observed,

"Data available on DVR no. 3 was crucial evidence of this case as camera of CCTV was installed just near the place of incident of this case. DVR no.1- the camera was not entirely covering the requisite portion as was installed far from the spot. It was found that in the night of 24/25.2.2020, a lot of persons of all age group were roaming here and there in groups on 33 Futa Road, Shiv Vihar. Mostly persons were carrying lathi/danda in their hands and some were wearing caps and helmet etc on their heads. Door of the houses near the spot were seen as closed. It was observed that angle of such camera of Ch. no.1 was changed to the wrong side at about 08.54.51 hrs and camera of Ch. no. 2 was changed to the wrong side at about 08.54.12 hrs to avoid capture in the CCTV Footage. DVR no.2 covering mostly the area of counter and nearby portion."

Lastly, the Court opined,

"Keeping in view the result of FSL report which does not support the prosecution case and the result of DVRs, it is not established that petitioner was present on the spot at the time when the incident took place in the present case."

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the prosecution case, the Court was of the view that the petitioner deserved bail.

Accordingly, he was directed to be released on bail forthwith on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court