Karkardooma Court acquits seven men in 2020 northeast Delhi riots case

New Delhi: A court has acquitted seven men accused of vandalism and burning shops and vehicles in the Dayal Pur area of northeast Delhi during riots in February 2020.
Karkardooma Court on Wednesday acquitted the accused, giving them benefit of the doubt and noting that their identity could not be established. The court also termed the testimony of a police constable unreliable.
The court also said that even the identity of the mob behind the incidents was not established. Allegedly, there were two mobs from two communities.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Pulastya Pramachala acquitted Shakil, Habib Raza, and Mohd Yamin, Usman, Shahid, Mohd Furkan and Mohd Irshad, giving them the benefit of doubt, as there wer contradictions in the testimony of the complainant.
" Thus, the evidence on the record fails to point out any of the accused persons with the help of any sustainable and inspiring evidence to show them as part of the mob of rioters," ASJ Pramachala said in the judgement passed on February 28.
The court held, "The evidence on the record also fails to establish the identity of the mob, which was actually behind the three incidents probed in this case."
The court also raised questions over the non-examination of police witnesses.
It said that Constable Pawan was not examined before the court and it is not known where he saw the accused, Furkan and Irshad.
" There is no relevance of pistol and danda, allegedly recovered at the instance of accused persons, otherwise. The recovery of Danda from an open place is otherwise also insignificant," the judge pointed out.
The court further pointed out that prosecution witness Duli Chand Pal (complainant) referred to two mobs being active at that place, meaning thereby that it could be any of these two mobs, which vandalise and set ablaze his shop.
The court observed, " Though Duli Chand deposed that he went upstairs to his house and the rioters broke the shutter of his shop, vandalised the same and put it on fire, but he did not even specify the identity of this particular mob."
The court noted that another prosecution witness/complainant, Allauddin on the other hand referred to a mob, which was raising slogans of 'Jai Shree Ram' etc., meaning thereby that the same could be a mob of persons from the Hindu community rather than the Muslim community.
ASJ Pramachala observed, " The case of prosecution shows that it was a situation of communal riot between the mobs of the Hindu and Muslim communities. The common object of both these mobs had to be against each other and could not be the same."
" Therefore, even for invoking the Section 149 (Unlawful Assembly) IPC, there must be clear-cut evidence on the record to show that one mob was identified to be involved in the incidents related to a particular place."
The court remarked, " The general presumption cannot be raised regarding the involvement of one of the mobs out of two. One mob cannot be responsible for the deeds of another mob, because of differences in their common object."
The court also noted that prosecution witness Constable Vineet was never joined in the arrest proceedings of these accused persons, though he was the person who allegedly named them before the Investigation Officer (IO) on March 5, 2020.
" Prosecution witness Vineet identified these accused persons after their arrest in the police station on March 9, 2020, itself, which is again another instance of coincidence. This coincidence does not appear natural. He had not named the fourth accused, Shakil, but he identified him also on March 9, 2020," the court pointed out.
The court observed, " This witness did not say anything about the burning of scooty of Duli Chand, nor were such facts inquired about from him by the IO."
" Therefore, his testimony does not inspire much confidence in respect of establishing the identity of the accused persons as part of the same mob, which was behind the incident at Anil Pastry Shop," the court said.
These accused persons were charge-sheeted by the Delhi police for the commission of offences punishable under Section 147/148/149/427/435/436/120-B IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act.
As per prosecution on March 4, 2020, an FIR was registered on a written complaint made by Duli Chand Pal. He had alleged that on February 22 at around 4 PM, a riotous mob after looting his "Anil Pastry Shop" situated at Main Road, Brijpuri, set the same on fire. He further alleged that he incurred a financial loss of around Rs 10-12 lakhs.
During further investigation, Duli Chand lodged another complaint on March 06, 2020. In this complaint, he alleged that his Scooty was also set on fire by the riotous mob on the said day. This Scooty was parked outside his aforesaid shop.
Thereafter, another complaint on February 29, 2020, was received from Allauddin alias Master Akash. He has alleged that on February 24, 2020, at about 6 PM, he received a call from his son Imtiyaz that rioters were roaming around his rented shop under the name and style of "Aakash Band", situated at Karawal Nagar Road, Shiv Vihar.
On February 28, 2020, Allauddin received a call that his shop was looted and set on fire by the riotous mob, he alleged.
On March 3, 2020, one more complaint was received from Mohd Shahid. In his complaint, he alleged that he had parked an autorickshaw in the parking of Jagat Palace, Shiv Vihar Tiraha, which was set on fire by the riotous mob on February 24, 2020.
During further investigation, IO recorded the statements of witnesses. Constable Vineet claimed to be an eyewitness, said that he had seen the incident and identified rioters, namely Habib Raza, Usman and Mohd Yameen.
On March 6, 2020, IO obtained CCTV footage of the riot. From the said CCTV footage, the accused persons, Mohd Furkan and Irshad were identified. Later on, other accused persons were arrested.
After completion of the investigation, on May 7, 2020, a chargesheet was filed in Karkardooma Court against accused Shakil, Habib Raza, Mohd. Yamin, Usman, Shahid, Furkan and Irshad, for offences punishable under Section 147/148/149/427/435/436/120B IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act.
On November 22, 2021, the first supplementary chargesheet with the addition of Sections 380/454/188 IPC along with complaint was filed by IO.