The Karkardooma Court (Delhi) granted bail to 3 people in a case related to northeast Delhi riots in February, expressing dubiety over their alleged role in the riots.
While granting the relief of Bail to Alam, Saifi and Shadab, the Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav.
The FIR in this matter was registered on 04.03.2020, on the written complaint of one Om Singh, wherein he stated that he had been running a paan-bidi shop at Khajuri Khas, at Karawal Nagar, which was vandalized and burnt by the riotous mob on 24.02.2020, as a result of which he suffered a loss to the tune of approximate Rs.55,000/- to Rs.60,000/-.
He further stated cash amounting to Rs.6,000/- was also looted from his shop. During the investigation of Delhi riots, it was revealed that the riotous mob had also looted, vandalized/damaged and set on fire several other shops and vehicles in the said area on 24.02.2020.
Also Read: Umar Khalid Sent to 10-day Police Custody in Delhi Riots Case After Arrest Under UAPA
Besides complainant Om Singh, 17 other complaints of similar nature were also received in the PS, which were later on clubbed in the present case of Delhi riots FIR.
The Court took into account the fact that the applicants have neither been named in the Delhi riots FIR nor there are any specific allegations against them by any of the complainants.
Admittedly, no CCTV footage/viral video capturing the presence of applicants at the scene of crime on the date of the incident was available on record.
The Court also noted that there is a gap of about 40 days between the date of incident and recording of statement of Beat Constable Pawan in the matter by the IO and no plausible explanation in this regard was given by the IO.
The Court said,
“Being a police official, what stopped Beat Constable Pawan from reporting the matter then and there in the PS or to bring the same in the knowledge of higher police officers. This casts serious doubt on the credibility of this witness. It is further relevant to note here that the applicants are residents of the same locality/area and as such, it is not surprising that their CDR location is being depicted at or around the scene of the crime on the date of the incident.“
Furthermore, the Court also observed that even the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C of public eyewitnesses were recorded by the IO recently much after the filing of the charge sheet.
Consequently, considering the facts and circumstances of the case in totality, all the applicants, namely Shah Alam, Rashid Saifi and Mohd Shadab were admitted to bail on their furnishing a Personal Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) each with one surety in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Ld.CMM/Ld.Illaka MM/Ld.Duty MM.