Northeast Delhi riots: court grants bail to two accused

A view of the riot-affected Chand Bagh-Karawal Nagar in northeast Delhi on February 26, 2020. Sandeep Saxena   | Photo Credit: Sandeep Saxena

A Delhi court has granted bail to two persons who were arrested for their alleged involvement in the northeast Delhi riots cases, noting that there was “hardly any connection” between the CCTV footage and the incident cited in the FIR.

Also read: HC designates 4 trial courts to deal with Delhi riots cases

Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav said, “A bare perusal of the FIR in this matter and the place where the applicant is stated to be seen rioting is altogether different”.

The court also questioned the delay of 112 days between the registration of the FIR and arrest of the accused.

The court enlarged Habib Ahmed and Irfan on bail under separate orders but with similar conditions. It said they would continue to join the investigation and shall not tamper with evidence.

The court also ordered them to keep their mobile phone in operational condition, the number to be intimated to the area SHO upon their release and also to install Aarogya Setu App.

The counsel, appearing for the duo, had argued that the alleged incident in the matter took place on February 24, 2020 whereas the FIR in the matter was registered on March 03, 2020 and the two were arrested after 112 days of recording of the FIR on June 14, 2020.

The counsel further argued that they had no previous involvement. “No TIP (test identification parade) in the matter was conducted. Even the police custody remand of the applicant was not sought in the matter,” the counsel said.

The additional public prosecutor, on the other hand, argued that the duo was seen rioting in CCTV footage of PWD camera which was lying mounted on 25 Futa Road, Chand Bagh. The additional public prosecutor further submitted that Constable Sunil has duly identified them.

“...there is hardly any connection between the CCTV footage and the incident in this case. As regards identification by Constable Sunil of the applicant is concerned, even same has no meaning as to why he kept waiting from 24.02.2020 till 14.06.2020 and not reported the matter to the police,” the court said.

Our code of editorial values

Related Topics
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Sep 19, 2021 5:30:55 AM |

Next Story