Witnesses either turned hostile or failed to identify the accused. The court also cited delay and legal faults in police statements
Team Clarion
NEW DELHI — The Karkardooma court has acquitted ten Muslims accused of arson and rioting during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots flagging “artificial” claims and contradictions in the statements made by witnesses.
Those acquitted by the court are Mohd. Shahnawaz, Mohd. Shoaib, Shahrukh, Rashid, Azad, Ashraf Ali, Parvez, Mohd. Faisal, Rashid and Mohd Tahir. They all were accused of rioting, torching properties and theft as per a press release issued by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind on Thursday. Jamiat provided legal help to some of the accused persons.
The Muslim group said that counsels provided by them brought to light contradictions in the claims made against the accused. “The witnesses either turned hostile or failed to identify the accused. The delay and legal faults in the statements by the police officers also forced the court to acquit the accused,” the Jamiat press release said.
Niyaz Faruqui, a Jamiat leader, said his organisation helped 600 accused in obtaining bail. Because of the legal assistance provided by the Jamiat, eight persons were acquitted of charges in cases related to the Delhi riots.
In the judgement delivered on Wednesday, the court observed that a witness examined by the prosecution who was running a shop near the place where the incident took place said that his shop was not burnt after the riots. However, a head constable and assistant sub-inspector (ASI) had claimed that the shop was burnt.
“Both of them claimed that the shop was also burnt by the rioters. This contradictory stand taken by these two alleged eyewitnesses creates a dent in their credibility,” Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala was quoted by The Indian Express as saying.
The court also pointed out that the two complainants did not back up the case of the prosecution on the aspect of identification of the accused as a part of the mob that indulged in vandalism during the incident. “I find it unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW6, PW9 and PW13 (all of whom were police witnesses) to believe that all the accused persons were part of the mob which had attacked the property,” the judge said while acquitting the accused.
As per the duty roster provided to the judge by the police, PW6 and PW13 (a constable and an ASI) were assigned duty in Chaman Park and PW9 (a head constable) was assigned duty in Johripur. However, the head constable had deposed before the court that he was on duty with the constable and the ASI. “This gap goes on to adversely affect the credibility of claims made by all aforesaid three eyewitnesses,” the court noted.
“Artificiality” in the claims of an investigating officer in the case was also flagged by the court. The third Investigative Officer (IO) in this case had stated that he knew about the duties of the three officers (PW6, PW9 and PW13). “…if the duty roster was not placed in the file when PW17 (the IO) received it on 07.04.2020, then how could he know about the duty of PW6, PW9 and PW13 on analysis of the file? Thus, there appears to be an element of artificiality in such a claim,” the judge said pulling up the IO.
