21 Nov 2023 6:17 AM GMT
A Delhi Court yesterday pulled up the Delhi Police for illegally clubbing 22 complaints in one FIR in connection with a Delhi riots case and said that it cannot be a party to such “illegal approach” of the investigating agency.“The present mind set shows the adamant approach to keep investigating all these additional complaints under one FIR itself, ignoring the mandate of law, that...
A Delhi Court yesterday pulled up the Delhi Police for illegally clubbing 22 complaints in one FIR in connection with a Delhi riots case and said that it cannot be a party to such “illegal approach” of the investigating agency.
“The present mind set shows the adamant approach to keep investigating all these additional complaints under one FIR itself, ignoring the mandate of law, that too after announcing the conclusion of investigation through chargesheets about complicity of accused persons in all these complaints. This court cannot be a party to such illegal approach of investigating agency…,” Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala said.
The court directed the concerned SHO to take back all the additional complaints for registration of separate cases and to conduct investigation in accordance with law.
“This court had to give such kind of directions in other cases also and it was expected that such exercise should have been undertaken on the part of investigating agency on their own, rather than awaiting such directions from the court in each case,” the court said.
The development ensued in FIR 148 of 2020 registered at Gokalpuri police station. The case was registered on the basis of a complaint made by one Rizwan.
Perusing a report submitted by the SHO, the court said that there were still complaints left, in respect of which the main and supplementary chargesheets were being pressed against the accused persons, “without having any concrete material to confirm the exact time and date of the incidents.”
“Hearsay evidence is not admissible evidence. Moreover, investigating agency already concluded in advance to chargesheet the accused persons in respect of all these 22 complaints. Though, they did not have such evidence with them to connect the accused with all these incidents,” the court said.
The judge rejected an application filed by the SHO seeking permission for further investigation in the matter.
“The situation mentioned in the application is not disputed by me, but what disturbs me is that investigating agency has already announced its conclusion in respect of 22 complaints (sought to be prosecuted in present case on the basis of chargesheets including 3rd supplementary chargesheet), even without having the evidence with it, to support such conclusion. This is not a legal exercise,” the court said.
It added that the exercise was apparently with a pre-mind set to keep all the complaints clubbed in the case, without having any legal basis to club them in the FIR.
“As per law, unless there was material with investigating agency to show and say that incident reported in additional complaints were in continuity of action of the incidents as reported by Rizwan, they had no ground to club those complaints in the present FIR,” the court observed.
It added: “Present case shall be entertained only in respect of complaint of Rizwan. A list of witnesses shall be filed by IO and ld. Special PP accordingly, to mention the relied upon witnesses in respect of complaint of Rizwan. On next date, arguments shall be heard on the point of charge limited to the complaint of Rizwan.”
Click Here To Read Order