Delhi Police Evidence 'Not Reliable And Sufficient' To Prove He Was Part Of Mob: Court Acquits Accused In 2020 Riots Case

A Delhi Court has acquitted an accused Noor Mohammad alias Noora of all the charges levelled against him by Delhi Police in a case of Northeast Delhi riots.

"There is no evidence of any kind of overt act against the accused herein, nor is there consistent testimony of four witnesses regarding identification of accused in riotous mob," said the court

Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala acquitted Noora of all the charges under Sections 147, 148, 427, 436 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Noora was accused in a case registered at Khajuri Khas police station on the basis of a written complaint filed by one Seema Arora alleging that her showroom was set ablaze by a mob on February 25, 2020 as a result of which she suffered a loss of over Rs. 12 lakhs.

Later, two more complaints were received regarding the incident of fire in the same building. One of the complaints lodged by Vishal Arora alleged that the rioters had vandalized the hall No 5 and 6 in the building. Another complaint lodged by Sundar Lal Arora alleged that the rioters had set on fire his shop in the same building due to which he had suffered loss of about Rs. 8 lakhs.

Since, the two complaints related to the incident of vandalism and arson in a common building, they were clubbed with the FIR in question.

During the investigation, Noora was "identified" by a beat constable Rohtash and Vishal Arora as a member of the "mob" who "indulged into vandalism and arson in the area" including at the building. Noora was then arrested after statements of both the witnesses were recorded.

Observing that damage was caused by a mob of more than five persons, the court said though the prosecution witness (Vishal Arora) also presented some photographs of the building but he did not show certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act to prove the evidence.

"This omission on the part of prosecution, to obtain requisite certificate from the concerned photographer and prove the photographs accordingly, leaves no option for this court but to ignore the photographs. Nonetheless, the testimonies of abovementioned witnesses, in absence of any dispute, are sufficient to prove that there was an unlawful assembly, which committed riot in that area and vandalized the property no. E-17, Khajuri Khas," the court said.

However, the court said the foremost question was whether Noora was involved in the evidence. The two complainants - Vishal Arora and Sundar Lal Arora, did not support the case of prosecution during trial. Sundar turned hostile in respect of giving any statement before police on March 5 in 2020 regarding identifying some of the rioters.

The court also took note of the testimony of constable Rohtash who said that Noora was not wearing any mask and that he did not know him prior to the incident, adding that he had only identified his face.

Observing that as per the IO's testimony it was the constable who told him about Noora's involvement in the riot for the first time, the court said: "Though, the investigation of this case was entrusted to PW8 (IO) on 09.03.2020, but PW8 did not examine PW6 (constable) prior to 02.04.2020. In his cross-examination, PW8 deposed that in this case prior to 09.03.2020, he had no information related to this case."

The court also said that although the constable had claimed that he had informed the SHO and IO about identifying some faces on the date of incident itself, however, the said fact was not formally recorded anywhere.

"May be during that time on account of tensed situation because of ongoing riots, it was not done so. However, proceedings of 02.04.2020 regarding interrogation of accused in other case and coincidental visit of PW2 (complainant Vishal Arora) and PW5 (complainant Sunder Lal Arora) as well as PW6 (constable) to that place in police station at the same time, resulting into identification of accused as one of the culprits in the incident in question, does not inspire confidence to rely upon the same," the court said.

The court said it does not find it safe to rely upon the sole identification by constable Rohtash to presume involvement of the accused in the incident in question.

"Hence, I find that evidence on record is not reliable and sufficient, to establish presence of accused in the mob, which indulged into riot and incident investigated in this case," the judge said.

Title: State v. Noor Mohammad @ Noora

Click Here To Read Order