scorecardresearch
Follow Us:
Saturday, September 25, 2021

No progress in riots case: Delhi court raps police

The court, however, framed charges for the offences of rioting, unlawful assembly, and criminal conspiracy against the accused Gulfam in the case related to alleged damage to infrastructure of a hall on February 25 last year by a riotous mob in Dayalpur area.

Written by Anand Mohan J | New Delhi |
Updated: September 6, 2021 7:08:53 am
Police had argued that the accused was arrested in the case pursuant to his disclosure statement in another matter in which he was earlier arrested.

A Delhi court pulled up the Delhi Police stating no progress has been made in the investigation of a Northeast Delhi riots case and the agency is still standing on the same square as it did last year.

The observations were made by Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav who, in his order, dropped a charge under IPC Section 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance) while noting that this section was not made out at all from the material produced on record by police.

The court, however, framed charges for the offences of rioting, unlawful assembly, and criminal conspiracy against the accused Gulfam in the case related to alleged damage to infrastructure of a hall on February 25 last year by a riotous mob in Dayalpur area.

“It is also relevant to note here that till date, the investigating agency has not been able to apprehend/arrest any other accused person in the matter, meaning thereby that no progress/further investigation in the case has been so far made and the investigating agency is still standing on the same square which it did when the accused was enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated October 14, 2020,” the order read.

It further noted the “complainant has not stated a single word regarding committing mischief by fire or explosive substance by the riotous mob in his hall”. The court said it was “beyond comprehension that under what provision(s) the investigating agency has imported the statements of witnesses recorded in another case in the matter in hand”. “Be that as it may, at this stage, even if the said issue is kept off the burner and the statements are coming considered on their face value, then also no ingredients of Section 436 IPC are getting made out therefrom,” the court said.

It added that there are no eyewitnesses of the incident in question and no CCTV footage of the incident was available on record.

During the hearing, advocate Anis Mohammad, who represented Gulfam, claimed that he was falsely implicated in the matter and that “besides his own disclosure statement, there is no other incriminating evidence to connect him with the commission of crime…”

Police had argued that the accused was arrested in the case pursuant to his disclosure statement in another matter in which he was earlier arrested. They alleged that he was found to be an active member of the riotous mob on the date and time of the incident in the locality.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Delhi News, download Indian Express App.

  • The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement