The convicts looted the shop, took goods out, burnt them on the road, and finally set the shop itself on fire, the verdict says
NEW DELHI — A court here has recently convicted six Hindus for vandalising and torching the shop of a Muslim trader in the Sadatpur area of Northeast Delhi during large-scale anti-Muslim violence in the national capital in 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh of the Karkardooma Court convicted Gorakh Nath, Bhim Sain, Hari Om Gupta, Kapil Pandey, Rohit Gautam, and Basant Kumar after considering testimony from head constable Sandeep and other key evidence. The accused were part of a mob carrying weapons that looted and set aflame the shop of complainant Muhammad Wakeel Ahmed.
According to the prosecution, on 25 February 2020, a mob of 100–150 rioters attacked Ahmed’s shop in the Sadatpur area of northeast Delhi. The convicts looted the shop, took goods out, burnt them on the road, and finally set the shop itself on fire. Ahmed later lodged a complaint at the Khajuri Khas police station.
Based on CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts, police arrested the six men and charged them with arson, rioting and destruction of property.
In his judgment delivered on 11 September, Judge Parveen Singh stated that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were part of an unlawful mob carrying sticks and stones. He held that they were guilty under Sections 188, 147/149, 148/149, 450/149 and 435/149 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court said the men were “liable to be convicted for the offences” and that sentencing would follow.
While convicting the accused, the court observed, “The common object of the unlawful assembly was to cause damage to the property and an act in furtherance of this mischief was done whereby the articles from the shop of the complainant were taken out and set afire.”
The complainant, Ahmed, had stated that he had suffered a loss of around Rs 1.50 lakhs. Thus, this mischief is covered within the definition of section 435 IPC, the court said.
“However, there is no evidence that this mischief was done with the intent to cause destruction to the building wherein the shop of the complainant was situated. Hence, I find that there is no sufficient evidence to convict the accused under section 436 read with section 149 IPC,” Judge Singh held.
