No Evidence That Indians Who Sheltered Tablighi Jamaat Attendees Spread COVID Or Violated Prohibitory Notification: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no evidence to show that the 70 Indian nationals, accused of sheltering attendees of Tablighi Jamaat congregation in their homes or mosques during COVID-19 pandemic, spread the disease or violated the prohibitory notification issued under Section 144 of CrPC. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna discharged the Indian nationals while quashing the chargesheets in the 16 FIRs registered against them by the Delhi Police. “The continuation of these Chargesheets would tantamount be abuse of the process and also is not in the interest of Justice, in terms of the Principles enunciated in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra),” the Court said.No Evidence that Prohibitory Notification was in their Knowledge Justice Krishna observed there was no evidence to show that the prohibitory notification issued under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. was promulgated and was within the knowledge of the accused persons. The Court observed that with the imposition of the lockdown w.e.f. 25.03.2020, the entire world came to stand still and no person whatsoever was permitted to step out of the house. It added that there was nothing to show that any information was actually conveyed to the accused persons. The Court further said that aside from making bald assertions that the Notification of concerned ACP was duly promulgated, there was no cogent evidence to the said effect in the entire Chargesheet.“The essential ingredient of promulgation to constitute an offence under Section 188 IPC, has therefore, not even have been established. Even if, entire prosecution case is admitted no offence is made out under Section 188 IPC,” the Court said. No Evidence that Accused congregated after promulgation of Prohibitory NotificationThe Court held that there was nothing on record to show that the accused had congregated after the promulgation of the Prohibitory Notification. It said that the accused were already present in the Markaz and after the imposition of the complete lockdown, there was no way possible for them to have dispersed and that their stepping out of the houses would have been violation of the complete lockdown and also of the potential of spreading of commutable disease of COVID-19. “In fact, in these peculiar circumstances, the question of human rights arose whereby their movement was curtailed on account of the pandemic and they were compelled to remain in the Markaz, where they had already congregated since prior to the Declaration of Lockdown. The congregation had not been subsequent to the Notification under Section 144 Cr.P.C. They were helpless people, who got confined on account of lockdown,” it said. Merely living in Markaz does not amount to violation of Prohibitory NotificationJustice Krishna said that merely because the accused were living in a Markaz, did not amount to violation of any of the activities, which were prescribed by the Prohibitory Notification. The Court said that they had assembled neither for any demonstration nor for any social, cultural, political, religious gatherings, organising weekly markets, or group tours and had done no activity after the Notification was issued.It noted that the Notification itself prescribed people suspected or confirmed with COVID-19 pandemic, to take home or institutional quarantine and to render assistance or comply with the directions of the surveillance personnel.No whisper in chargesheet that accused were found COVID positive or spread itThe Court concluded that there was no whisper in the entire Chargesheet that any of the accused were found COVID-19 positive or that they were likely to spread COVID-19. “In the present case as well, there is not a whisper in the FIRs or the Chargesheets that Petitioners were found COVID-19 positive or they had moved out negligently or unlawfully with intent or knowledge to spread the disease of COVID-19, which was dangerous to human life,” the Court said. No violation of order issued under Disaster Management ActJustice Krishna also held that there was no evidence to show that any criminal act, whether under Disaster Management Act or Epidemic Diseases Act, was committed by the accused persons. Also Read: Delhi High Court Quashes Charges Against Indian Nationals For Sheltering Tablighi Jamaat Attendees During COVID-19Counsel for Petitioners: Ms. Ashima Mandla and Ms. Mandakini Singh, AdvocatesCounsel for Respondent: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for State with Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Nitish Dhawan, Mr. Rahul Kochar, Ms. Chavi Lazarus and Ms. Sanskriti Nimbekar, AdvocatesTitle: MOHD ANWAR & ORS. v. STATE NCT OF DELHI and other connected mattersClick here to read order

No Evidence That Indians Who Sheltered Tablighi Jamaat Attendees Spread COVID Or Violated Prohibitory Notification: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags