Khalid Saifi gave gun to child during 2020 Delhi riots, asked him to open fire at police: Prosecution

Saifi challenged two orders by a Shahdara court—one from January 1 and another from April 29—in which charges were framed against him and 12 others.

Through his counsel, senior advocate Rebecca John, Saifi contended before the Delhi High Court that to frame the charge of IPC Section 307 (atttempt to murder), the prosecution had to first establish a shared a common objective and that he was part of unlawful assembly. Secondly, he said, the prosecution had to establish that he was aware of the offences likely to be committed to achieve the common objective.

Saifi submitted that no such evidence was produced or addressed while the charge for attempt to murder was framed. Additionally. it was argued that charges of rioting, common objective and unlawful assembly cannot sustain as no substantive evidence or CCTV footage was brought on record.

His counsel also argued that the trial court had failed to consider that he was subjected to custodial torture at the hands of police and a direction had been given by the Ld. duty magistrate on February 26, 2020, to the assistant commissioner of police concerned to conduct an inquiry into the matter, however till date, no such enquiry had been conducted.

Relying on witness statements, including that of a head constable which attested to Saifi’s alleged presence at the site of the offence, the court of Justice Manoj Ohri recorded, “On a prima facie reading of the material on record finds that the presence and role of the revisionist (Saifi) has been stated by the public persons and the police official.”

“The protests led to one Ct. Vinod sustaining injuries. A gunshot was fired and the said firearm was even recovered from a CCL (child in conflict with law) who disclosed that the same was provided to him by the revisionist (Saifi), who had instructed him to fire upon the police. The identity of the revisionist is not in dispute. In light of the above-noted facts, this court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned orders of the trial court,” Justice Ohri ruled.

The main chargesheet in this case was filed against six accused, namely Isharat Jahan, Khalid Saifi, Salim, Vikram Pratap, Samir Ansari and Sabu Ansari under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 147, 148 (rioting), 149 (unlawful assembly with common objective), 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of their function), 188 (disobedience of order issued by a public servant), 332 (voluntarily causing hurt), 353 (assault), 307 (attempt to murder), 109 (abetment), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 34 (common intention) and under sections 24 and 27 of the Arms Act.

The trial court had discharged the accused from the offences under IPC sections 34, 109 and 120B as well as from the offences under the Arms Act while framing the remaining charges.