Delhi Riots: High Court Denies Bail To Tahir Hussain In IB Staffer Ankit Sharma Murder Case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday denied bail to former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain's regular bail plea in the murder case of Intelligence Bureau (IB) staffer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the bail plea filed by Hussain in FIR 65 of 2020 registered at Dayalpur police station. 

The Court observed that Sharma's murder cannot be viewed as a standalone incident or a spontaneous act of violence but it was contextualized as a direct and foreseeable off-shoot of the larger criminal conspiracy of the riots.

"It was a premeditated and well-orchestrated conspiracy, allegedly hatched between several accused persons, of which the Applicant/Tahir Hussain was the mastermind. He in a well-planned manner had shifted his family well in time. The prosecution alleges that the Applicant's house near Chand Bagh Pulia was allegedly identified as a key protest and riot site in the larger conspiracy," the Court said.

It added that Hussain's house was used as a “fort” and an operational base to attack members of the Hindu community. The judge also said that the conspiracy involved escalating the anti-CAA/NRC protests into chakka-jaams and violent riots, particularly during the state visit of the US President, to garner international attention .

"Therefore, the incident in the present FIR 65/2020 is not merely an ancillary crime, but a gruesome manifestation of the larger conspiracy. The dragging of Ankit Sharma by an enraged mob, his brutal murder with 51 injuries, and the subsequent disposal of his body in a drain, defines the gravity of the offence. Viewing this incident as an off-shoot of the larger conspiracy is essential to appreciate its full gravity and the prima facie role of the Applicant within it," the Court said.

"It need not be emphasized that while a speedy trial is the constitutional right of every accused, prolonged incarceration cannot be the sole ground for granting bail in a case of this magnitude, which involves allegations of orchestrating large-scale communal violence resulting in the brutal murder of an Intelligence Bureau officer. Long incarceration in itself ought not to lead to enlargement on bail when the facts prima facie show involvement in grave and serious offences," it added.

Hussain had filed a similar bail plea in the case in December last year. However, the same was withdrawn in February on account of subsequent development, with the liberty to approach the trial court.

On March 12, the trial court dismissed his bail plea, observing that there was no material change in the circumstances to grant bail to him. Accordingly, Tahir has now again approached the High Court to seek the relief.

Tahir has completed more than 5 years in custody in the case.

The FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint made by the deceased's father. He had lodged a missing report when his son went missing during the riots. Ankit's body was later recovered from a drain. He was declared as brought dead by GTB hospital.

The complainant's son Ankit Sharma, an Officer working with the Intelligence Bureau, left his house at around 5 pmon the said date for buying groceries and general household items. However, he did not return home even after several hours.

Later, his dead body was found lying in a drain near Chand Bagh Pulia. He had sustained sharp injuries on his head, face, chest, back and on his waist.

Thereafter, an FIR was registered by the complainant stating that he had strong suspicion that his son was killed by the main accused Tahir Hussain and his associates.

The post-mortem report of the deceased Ankit Sharma revealed that there were 51 injuries caused due to sharp edged weapons and blunt force.

In March 2023, the trial court framed charges against Tahir Hussain, Haseen, Nazim, Kasim, Sameer Khan, Anas, Firoz, Javed, Gulfam, Shoaib Alam and Muntajim.

Charges were framed under sections 147, 148, 153A, 302, 365, 120B, 149, 188 and 153A of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Hussain was additionally charged under sections 505, 109 and 114 of IPC. Accused Nazim was additionally charged under section 25 of the Arms Act.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Ms. Tara Narula, Ms. Shivangi , Mr. Hamendra , Ms. Sonal , and Mr. Shreya Sharma, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Mr Rajat Nair, SPP and Mr. Dhruv Pandey, Advocate

Case Title: Tahir Hussain v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

click here to read order