Last Update: January 31, 2023, 12:03 pm IST
He was accused of setting fire to a shop and house during the riot complex. (File photo/Reuters)
Nine people were accused of setting a shop and house on fire during the riots and the police charge-sheeted them for offenses punishable under sections 147–149, 188, 427 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code.
A Delhi court on Monday acquitted nine people accused of rioting, arson and other offenses during the 2020 Delhi riots, giving them the benefit of doubt, including the delay by the police in registering crucial information related to the accused’s involvement.
They are accused of setting a shop and house on fire during the riots and the police charge-sheeted them for committing offenses punishable under sections 147-149, 188, 427 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code.
Pulastya Pramachala, Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Court, said: “I hold that the sole testimony of Head Constable Vipin cannot be sufficient to infer the presence of the accused persons in the mob which torched the complainant’s property at Chaman Vihar. In such a situation, the benefit of doubt is given to the accused persons.”
The acquitted persons are Mohd. Shahnawaz alias Shanu, Shahrukh, Mohd. Shoaib alias Chhutwa, Azad, Md. Faisal, Rashid alias Raja, Ashraf Ali, Parvej and Rashid alias Monu.
Pramachala said that even though Vipin attended the briefing at the police station with the Investigating Officers (IOs) every day, he did not formally record it anywhere.
The Additional Sessions Judge said: “In his cross-examination, Vipin accepted that there was a briefing everyday at the police station, which was attended by him as well as the IO. Yet, as of April 7, 2020, the information regarding the involvement of the accused persons was not formally recorded anywhere.”
The court, however, noted that Vipin had said that he had verbally informed his superiors about the information with him after about a week or 15 days of the riots.
“No explanation has been given by this witness for such delay in giving such vital information to the senior officers,” the court said.
The court said, ‘If in fact such information was given to the senior officers, then why the senior officers did not formally register such information.’
Pramachala said: “Considering such delay in disclosure of vital information, I find it desirable to apply the test of consecutive testimony of more than one witness in the present case also.”
The Additional Sessions Judge, while granting benefit of doubt to the accused persons, granted relief and observed: “Applying that test, I hold that the sole testimony of PW9 cannot be sufficient to hold that there was presence of the accused persons in the crowd , who had set the property on fire.” Complainant Chaman Vihar. In such a situation, the benefit of doubt is given to the accused persons.”
read all latest india news Here
(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed)