"Witnesses' Statements Can't Be Discarded Even Though Recorded After More Than One Year": Court Frames Charges Against Six In Delhi Riots Case

A Delhi Court on Friday framed charges against six men in connection with a case concerning the North East Delhi riots of 2020 observing that statements of witnesses cannot be discarded at the stage of framing of charges even though recorded after more than one year of incident of violence. Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhat framed charges against Bilal Ansari, Suhail @ Bholu, Imran, Gulfam, Sameer Saifi and Salman under Section 147 (Punishment for rioting), 148 (Rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 380 (Theft in dwelling house), 436 (Mischief by fire), 457 (Lurking house-trespass) read with sec. 149 (Unlawful assembly) of Indian Penal Code, 1860."Even though the statements of these witnesses have been recorded after more than one year of the incident of violence involved in this case, still it would not serve the ends of justice to discard their version at this very stage where charges are to be decided against the accused," the Court said. The Judge added "In a case like the instant one, which has its genesis in unprecedented communal riots that had erupted in North East area on 24.02.2020 and in which large number of rioters were involved who had caused not only large scale destruction of properties but also have resorted to killing of several innocent persons, it is not only expected of Investigating Agency but also necessary to continue further investigation of the case even after the filing of the first chargesheet by making further endeavour to nab more culprits and to trace more eye witnesses."The case of the prosecution arises out of five complaints which were received in the concerned police station with regards to the vandalization and arson in city's Yamuna Vihar area. The statements under sec. 161 CrPC of the complainants were recorded and rough site plan was prepared showing all the incident spots. The police also collected the photographs of the damaged or burnt properties from the complainants.The Investigating Officer came to know on 05.03.2020 that the concerned ASI had arrested accused Gulfam, Bilal Ansari, Imran and Suhail @ Bholu in FIR 78/2020 and that they had disclosed their involvement in the incidents forming subject matter of the FIR registered in the present case. The IO had then interrogated all the four accused and checked a viral video wherein the accused were seen pelting stones. Accordingly, the IO arrested four accused. In further investigation, two other accused were arrested. During the course of further investigation, statements of various witnesses namely Constables Mukesh and Ashwani etc. were recorded with regards to the identification of the accused as rioters. Thereafter, a supplementary chargesheet was filed which had been tagged with the main chargesheet."Statements of Ct.Mukesh and Ct.Ashwani dt.21.05.2020 which have been annexed alongwith the supplementary chargesheet reveal that both of them were present in their respective beats on 24.02.2020 and 25.02.2020 during the riots and had seen accused Gulfam, Bilal Ansari, Suhail @ Bholu, Imran, Salman @ Taseem@ Bhondal and Sameer Saifi @ Pummy present in the unlawful assembly indulging in vandalization and arson in the shops and houses on the NoorE Illahi road and Vijay Park near Mother Dairy. They claim to have known all the 6 accused and thus were able to recognize them in the mob," the Court noted. The Court noted that it is a settled principle of law that at the time of deciding charges against the accused, the court has to consider both the initial chargesheet as well as the supplementary chargesheet to ascertain whether there is a ground for presuming that accused have committed the offence. "Resultantly, even if the statements of the witnesses, who have identified the accused as rioters on the basis of viral video shown to them by the IO as well as the said viral video is taken out of consideration, still there is sufficient evidence in the shape of statements of two witnesses Ct.Mukesh and Ct.Ashwani which prima facie establish the involvement of the accused in the incident in question at this stage. No case for their discharge has been made out," the Judge said. The Court noted that there were only two eye witnesses in the matter who had stated that the accused were well known to them before the riots and hence they were able to identify them in the mob. "In view of the same, there was no requirement of conducting TIP to establish the identity of the accused," it added. The Court ordered "Hence, the charges for the offences punishable u/s 147/148/380/436/457 r/w section 149 IPC are liable to be framed against all the accused."Case Title: State v. Bilal AnsariClick Here To Read Order

"Witnesses' Statements Can't Be Discarded Even Though Recorded After More Than One Year": Court Frames Charges Against Six In Delhi Riots Case

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags