Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Delhi Riots| "Shahrukh Pathan Has Family History Of Criminal Cases, Has No Remorse For Illegal Acts": Prosecution Opposes Bail Plea In High Court

Nupur Thapliyal
16 March 2022 11:45 AM GMT
Delhi Riots| Shahrukh Pathan Has Family History Of Criminal Cases, Has No Remorse For Illegal Acts: Prosecution Opposes Bail Plea In High Court
x

Opposing the bail plea filed by Shahrukh Pathan, the man who pointed a gun at a policeman during North East Delhi riots, the prosecution has told the High Court that Pathan has family history of criminal cases and that he has no remorse for his illegal actions. The case relates to rioting, causing injuries to police personnel and gunshot injury sustained by one Rohit Shukla by an armed mob....

Opposing the bail plea filed by Shahrukh Pathan, the man who pointed a gun at a policeman during North East Delhi riots, the prosecution has told the High Court that Pathan has family history of criminal cases and that he has no remorse for his illegal actions.

The case relates to rioting, causing injuries to police personnel and gunshot injury sustained by one Rohit Shukla by an armed mob. (FIR 49/2020 registered at Jafrabad Police Station)

In the status report filed in the bail plea, it has been stated that Pathan can influence the witnesses in active and passive way as he has a family history of crime.

The bail plea is opposed on the ground that Pathan has been involved in one other case of riots wherein he had already been denied bail.

"The Petitioner has been keeping illegal arm and ammunition and has no remorse for his illegal act. His daring act of firing at a policeman and public shows that if released on bail, he can repeat such criminal act," the status report adds.

It has also been stated that Pathan had absconded after the incident and was incarcerated since past 2 years, while his multiple bail applications have already been dismissed.

"Considering the same there is high likelihood the petitioner may abscond again if released on bail," the report reads.

The supplementary status report further states that the statement of the eye witnesses and seized CCTV footages establishes that Pathan was leading the mob and indulged in the act of rioting on February 24, 2020 during which he fired on the complainant and public from his pistol.

"That, the applicant's father Sabir Ali @ Baldev Singh was convicted for 10 years with fine of Rs.1 Lac in FIR No.03/10 PS Kotwali, Delhi registered u/ 14 Foreigners Act, 489B,489C, 120B IPC r/w 20/61/85 NDPS Act. As per the available record, the applicant's father was also arrested in the year 1994 by Crime Branch for possession of contraband 'Charas' and in the year 1995 he along with his 4 accomplices was arrested in Bikaner, Rajasthan with 60 kgs. Heroin. Hence, the applicant has a family history of criminal cases," the report adds.

It adds "There are police and public witnesses who have identified the applicant. From the criminal family history and desperate nature of the applicant, it can be evidently inferred that the witnesses can be adversely influenced by the applicant."

Pathan's bail plea was rejected by a city Sessions Court in December last year after the Court was of the view that the CCTV footage of a nearby camera installed at the relevant location showed his presence in the riotous mob.

The FIR was registered under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (Rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 188 (Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, etc.), 283 (Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation), 353 (Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 332 (Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 307 (attempt to murder), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) r/w 34 of IPC along with sec. 27 of the Arms Act.

The injured person Rohit Shukla had given a statement that February 24 last year, there were two groups of people, one of which was shouting "Allah­hu­Akbar" and protesting against CAA and NRC. He also stated that the unlawful assembly turned violent and started throwing stones and one person held a pistol shot at him.

He also gave a statement that at another location, out of a violent crowd, a boy aged 24­ to 25 years came out with pistol and tried to kill him. According to the statement, it was alleged that the boy fired at the witness who had then received injuries.

Case Title: Shahrukh Pathan v. State

Next Story