Jahangirpuri Violence: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail, Says Accused Allegedly Tried To Create A "Rift Between Two Communities"

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday denied anticipatory bail to an accused in connection with the Jahangirpuri riots observing that his conduct was allegedly an "attempt to disturb the communal harmony of the area" by trying to create a "rift between two communities."Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma also noted that suspicious material was found on the terrace of his house during the riots and he had been non-cooperative during investigation. It observed:"Ensuring peace and harmony in the country and communities is the most sacred duty of not only the law enforcing agencies and the Courts but duty has been caste on every citizen of this country that they should maintain peace and harmony and ensure that their acts do not instigate and promote communal hatred or ill-will."The Court further noted that the accused was named by one of the eye witness as one of the perpetrator. "It is not disputed that the said premises is owned by the accused/applicant herein. It is also not disputed that the accused/applicant has been absconding and has not cooperated in the investigation, rather, proceedings under section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. have been initiated against him. Custodial interrogation of the accused/applicant is warranted in the present case," the Court said. While denying anticipatory bail to one Sheikh Ishrafil, the Court further observed that he had not joined investigation and was purposefully evading arrest. "The court cannot allow investigations to be thwarted by such applicants," the Court said. "Though on one hand, it is argued that the applicant was in charge of ensuring peace in the locality, on the other hand, his conduct of not co-operating with the investigating agency or even joining investigation despite the fact that suspicious material has been found on the terrace of his house during the Jahangir Puri riots points to the contrary," it added. The Court further opined that an individual who is not cooperating with the investigation agencies to ascertain whether he partook in such "nefarious activities" is not entitled to anticipatory bail or claim infringement of his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. "It is a strange paradox that the applicant claims he is area incharge of "Aman Committee", but has not joined investigation of offences which have defeated the very purpose and aim of such committee," the Court said. The development ensued in an FIR registered under sec. 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 307, 323, 427, 436, 109, 120B and 34 of Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution, Sheikh Ishrafil was allegedly one of the main conspirators and perpetrators of the entire incident and was also evading the process of law.The High Court recently in June this year, dismissed Ishrafil's petition seeking directions on the city police not to harass him and his family members in the name of interrogation. Justice Asha Menon rejected his plea while observing that the petition appeared to be of a phishing kind, seeking anticipatory bail, in the garb of directions to the police not to harass him and his family.[Jahangirpuri Riots] 'Appears To Be Of A Phishing Kind': High Court Dismisses Plea By Accused Alleging Harassment By Delhi PoliceCase Title: SHEIKH ISHRAFIL v. STATE (NCT) OF DELHICitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 787Click Here To Read Order

Jahangirpuri Violence: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail, Says Accused Allegedly Tried To Create A "Rift Between Two Communities"

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags