News Updates

Tablighi Jamaat: Delhi Court Dismisses Plea Moved By State Against The Discharge of 44 Foreign Nationals

Karan Tripathi
19 Nov 2020 2:48 PM GMT
Tablighi Jamaat: Delhi Court Dismisses Plea Moved By State Against The Discharge of 44 Foreign Nationals

Delhi Court has dismissed the criminal revision petitions moved by the State against the discharge of 44 foreign nationals related to the Tablighi Jamaat case.

While dismissing the said revision petitions, the court of Additional Sessions Judge Sandeep Yadav noted that the evidence collected during the investigation is wholly insufficient to frame the charge against the Respondents.

The said criminal revision petitions were moved against the order dated 24/08/20 of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate wherein the respondent foreign nationals were discharged of all the charges against them.

The State had invoked the FIR registered against the respondents wherein they've been charged under section 14 (b) of Foreigners Act, Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act 1897, Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act and Section 188/269/270/271/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

While discharging the respondents, the CMM had noted that the entire chargesheet and documents attached thereto neither showed their presence nor participation in the Markez during the relevant period. The CMM had further noted that:

'there is no document on record to suggest that respondent was one of the participants who was involved in Tablighi work. It was further observed that name of the respondent is not specifically mentioned either in the copy of the register seized or in the list of SDM providing the details of the persons who were sent from Markaz either to the hospital or Quarantine Centers or the list of persons who were part of Markez and were tested for Covid-19.'

While upholding the order of the CMM, the present court observed that:

'In the present case, no vital information was extracted from the respondent which could form the basis for carving out an exception to the general provision about inadmissibility of confession made in police custody.No admission of any vital fact was made by the respondent in response to the questionnaire and hence, the reference to Section 58 of Indian Evidence Act is of no consequence.'

The Respondents in the present matter were represented by Ms Ashima Mandla and Ms Mandakini Singh

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order]

Next Story
Share it