Several defendants from opposing mobs were listed together for multiple offenses, leaving details about specific acts of damage and arson unresolved, the judge said
NEW DELHI – A court here has pulled up the police for improper probe into a case of arson and vandalism of properties during the largely anti-Muslim northeast Delhi riots of 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh of Karkardooma Courts observed that the legal proceedings were in a ‘complete mess’ and lacked clarity regarding the actions of the various groups involved in the violence. Expressing concern over the unclear charges against different mobs involved in the riots, the court called for immediate corrective measures.
Several defendants from opposing mobs were listed together for multiple offenses, leaving details about specific acts of damage and arson unresolved, the judge said in his order passed on October 16, according to media reports on Tuesday.
The court said the police blatantly disregarded an order passed by the same court on January 21 this year, directing a clearer investigation into the case.
In his order, Judge Singh instructed the Delhi Police Commissioner to ensure that previous directives are followed, with a comprehensive report due by the next hearing on November 14. This directive follows the prosecution’s failed attempts to present new evidence through additional charge sheets.
Police made five arrests in the case and filed a charge sheet under the penal sections pertaining to rioting, arson, and criminal conspiracy. The accused, Komal Mishra, Gaurav, Golu, Azhar, and Mohd Arif, are all currently on bail.
On January 21, as the case proceeded to framing of charges, the court questioned the investigators, noting that members of both groups were named in the charge sheet and there was no clarity over which group had damaged which specific property. The court directed police to present evidence with clarity and clear timelines.
In the latest development, the prosecution filed a supplementary charge sheet, seeking withdrawal of complaints of seven persons and discharge of two of the accused, Mohd Azhar and Arif, reasoning that separate FIRs would be lodged in relation to these seven complaints and the two accused for whom discharge had been sought.
Judge Singh observed, “…instead of conducting further investigation as directed, and to show the court how these two mobs could have been connected in sharing a common object, the prosecution, if I am bold enough to say so, has tries to circumvent that order…”
The court noted that at the same time, the supplementary charge sheet did not disclose any FIR being lodged against the two accused persons for whom discharge had been sought. Noting that the supplementary charge sheet was filed merely to defeat the previous orders of the court, the court highlighted that the three other complaints have also not been investigated by the police so far.
