A Karkardooma court on Saturday framed charges against former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain and five others under Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), for ‘statements conducing to public mischief’, during the north-east Delhi riots in 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala observed that Hussain, Shah Alam, Nazim, Kasim, Riyasat and Liyakat were acting with a “clear-cut objective in mind” to “kill and harm Hindus”.
“On the record, evidences showed that the accused were instigating others to ‘teach a lesson to Hindus’ and ‘not to leave them’. Hence the accused are liable to be tried for offence under Section 505 of the Code as well,” the order said.
The accused were also booked under Sections 307 (read with 120B) and 149 of the IPC. Two other accused, Tanvir and Gulfam, were discharged from charges under Section 505.
Hussain faces charges in multiple cases related to the riots. In the present matter, a complainant Ajay Goswami had alleged that he was hit by a bullet fired by a mob which was rioting near Karawal Road on February 2, 2020. He had accused Tanvir and Gulfam of the firing.
During investigation, police found that the mob had assembled at Hussain’s house and some of them were carrying weapons, acid and petrol bombs.
On Thursday, in another case related to the riots, Hussain had been booked under IPC Sections of money laundering by a Shahdara court. The Enforcement Directorate had alleged that Hussain and his associates hatched a conspiracy to fraudulently withdraw money from the accounts of certain companies, which was put to use during the riots.
The court said that in terms of contents of the complaint and accompanying documents and statements, it emerges prima facie that the accused had acted in conspiracy and engaged in money laundering, as stated in the aforesaid paragraphs, under the provisions of PMLA. The proceeds of crime generated in the conspiracy were put to use for the riots.
“Thus, I hold that a charge be framed against the accused Tahir Hussain for the offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002,” the order had said.
COMMents
SHARE