AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan gets pre-arrest bail in ‘obstruction of arrest’ case

When the police had registered an FIR against the AAP MLA, the Judge had on February 14 granted him interim protection from arrest for 10 days, which was later extended by a day. At the time, the Judge had also questioned the police over the attempt to arrest Shahwez Khan even as he had secured an anticipatory bail.

On Monday, Special Judge Singh pointed out that a supplementary chargesheet was not filed against Shawez and asked, “…What were the police officers doing with him inside a shop for 20 minutes?”

In his order on Tuesday, the Judge said, “The conduct of the police team in detaining the accused Shahwez Khan inside the shop for about 20 minutes without any reason casts a cloud of doubt as they had the opportunity to immediately arrest accused Shahwez Khan. The police official cannot be allowed to justify their act of illegal detention as merely being a mistake of fact and, thereafter, disentitle the accused of his right under the colour of performing official duty.”

On Monday, the Judge had also asked for the CCTV footage of Shahwez going inside the shop where the MLA allegedly obstructed his arrest.

“The CCTV footage after 2.29 pm is not available due to an alleged power cut in the area. The prosecution has failed to explain why the time of alleged offence was stated as 2.30 pm to 3 pm by the police team, even though accused Shahwez Khan was detained at 2.07 pm, as is apparently clear in the CCTV footage,” he noted in Tuesday’s order.

Senior Public Prosecutor (SPP) Atul Srivastava earlier argued that even if Shahwez Khan was on anticipatory bail, the AAP MLA had no right to interfere with the functioning of the police.

Amanatullah Khan and his supporters had been booked under sections 221 (obstruction of public servants while they are performing their duties), and 132 (criminal force or assault against a public servant while they are performing their duties), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Seeking the AAP MLA’s custody on behalf of the Delhi Police, Srivastava had also said that they wanted to question him. The SPP stated that Amanatullah Khan was a powerful person who could influence witnesses and that he was lying about his absence in the area.

Advocate Rajat Bharadwaj, who represented the MLA along with advocates Mohammed Irshad and Kaustubh Khanna, argued before the court that the status report filed in the case was the Delhi Police’s admission of their mistake. He alleged that the police ‘inadvertently’ forgot to remove the name of Shahwez from the proclaimed offender’s list.

The order said, “Here, no injury has been caused to any of the police officials and taking into account the alleged role of the applicant, I am of the opinion that anticipatory bail must not be denied solely on the basis of criminal antecedents.”

Of the 26 cases registered against the AAP MLA, he has been discharged or acquitted in 16. Five are pending trial and investigation is yet to be completed in another five cases.