Delhi Riots: Court Raps Delhi Police For 'False Case' Against Six Men Accused Of Arson Near Mosque, Acquits All

A Delhi Court has rapped the Delhi Police for foisting “false case” against six men in relation to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh of Karkardooma Courts said that there was “egregious padding of evidence” by the Investigating officer, resulting in “serious trampling” of rights of the accused persons.

The judge acquitted Ishu Gupta, Prem Prakash, Raj Kumar, Manish Sharma, Rahul and Amit- all accused of committing arson near Azizia Masjid during the riots.

“In view of my aforesaid discussions, it is apparent that merely in order to work out a case, a false case has been foisted upon the accused and PW10 HC Vikas, the only eye witness of the case, is completely unreliable qua these accused persons. All the accused are entitled to be acquitted of all the charges,” the Court said.

“I must observe that there has been an egregious padding of evidence by the IO and this has resulted in serious trampling of the rights of the accused, who have been probably charge sheeted only in order to show that this case is worked out,” it added.

The Court observed that the situation was more saddening because despite the glaring defects, the supervising officers being the SHO and ACP, had forwarded the charge sheet in a mechanical manner.

“Such instances lead to serious erosion of the faith of the people in the investigating process and the rule of law and therefore, I deem it appropriate that the copy of this judgment be sent to worthy Commissioner of Police for his perusal, with a request to take remedial action,” the Court said.

As per the FIR, a mob of rioters had set on fire one scooty, homes and shops in the gali in front of the Azizia Masjid.

Questioning the timing of the accused, the Court observed that it failed to understand how was it possible that the persons, who were initially arrested in another FIR at 8.00 p.m and 9.00 p.m, could have been arrested in the case in hand around 10-11 hours prior to the said arrest and that too on the basis of disclosure made in that FIR.

Perusing the case diary, the Court said that it established the fact that the IO had “cooked up” a case to somehow work it out and foisted it upon the accused persons.

It further said that the sudden appearance of one of the prosecution witness and non conducting of TIP created “serious doubts” about the manner in which the investigation was conducted.

Click here to read order