Delhi violence calculated attempt to disrupt normal life: HC

The court has denied bail to accused Ibrahim in the case pertaining to the murder of head constable Ratan Lal

Bail RejectedImage

While denying bail to accused Mohd. Ibrahim in the murder case of head constable Ratan Lal during the communal violence last year, the high court has ruled that the violence did not take place in a spur of the moment, and that “the conduct of the protesters who are present in the video footage which has been placed on record by the prosecution visibly portrays that it was a calculated attempt to dislocate the functioning of the Government as well as to disrupt the normal life of the people in the city.”

Justice Subramonium Prasad said, “The systematic disconnection and destruction of the CCTV cameras also confirms the existence of a pre-planned and premeditated conspiracy to disturb law and order in the city. This is also evident from the fact that innumerable rioters ruthlessly descended with sticks, dandas, bats etc. upon a hopelessly outnumbered cohort of police officials.”

Even though Ibrahim was not present at the crime scene, the court observed that he clearly was a part of the mob for the sole reason that “the Petitioner (Ibrahim) had consciously travelled 1.6 kms away from his neighbourhood with a sword which could only be used to incite violence and inflict damage.”

Justice Prasad said that the footage of Ibrahim with the sword is “quite egregious”, and is therefore sufficient to keep him in custody. By identifying him in multiple pieces of footage, the court called it “clinching evidence” and that “tilts this Court towards prolonging the incarceration of the Petitioner is that the weapon which is being carried by the Petitioner is capable of causing grievous injuries and/or death, and is prima facie a dangerous weapon.”

Ibrahim argued before the court that he was not part of the violence or the anti-CAA protests, and that the deadly nature of the violence prompted both Hindus and Muslims to guard their neighbourhoods by carrying various weapons to be able to defend themselves only in the event of an attack as the police had allegedly become either mere spectators or were helping the rioters. But the court refused to entertain this argument.

Eleven people applied for bail in the same case related to the murder of head constable Ratan Lal during the violence. On September 14, the high court granted bail to Shahnawaz and Mohd. Ayyub, and dismissed the bail pleas of Sadiq and Irshad Ali. On September 3, the high court pulled up the Police for their vague evidence and general allegations, granting bail to 5 accused- Mohd. Arif, Shadab Ahmad, Furkan, Suvaleen and Tabassum.

Despite several judgments rapping the Police for their callous investigation into the violence, some right-wing supremacists have lauded this order that called it a planned conspiracy. It is noteworthy to mention that hate monger Kapil Mishra took to Twitter to reiterate the court’s order and blame the “pseudo intellectuals and senior journalists” who allegedly spun a false narrative and targeted him.

He said, “the court said this was pre planned. We have also been saying the same thing. Weapons and bombs were collected and Delhi was burnt. Thousands would have been killed if we had not reached Maujpur chowk….weapons were collected in Tahir Hussain’s house.”

Tahir Hussain’s brother, Shah Alam, was recently granted bail by the district court, after criticising the Delhi Police for their callous attitude. ASJ Vinod Yadav said, “The police seem to be still busy filing supplementary chargesheets therein. The precious judicial time of this Court is being wasted in giving dates in those cases…where there is hardly any investigation carried out by the police.”

The court expressed its anger at the fact that the Alam, along with co-accused Rashid and Shadab were neither specifically named in the FIR, nor a particular role was assigned to them. This was followed by the observation that, “The sort of investigation conducted in the instant case and the lack of supervision thereof by the superior officers clearly depicts that the investigating agency has merely tried to pull the wool over the Court’s eyes and nothing else.”

Shifting the focus back to Kapil Mishra, his video of issuing an ultimatum to Delhi police and suggesting that his people would “take the law into their own hands” should the police fail to evict anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protesters from near the Jafrabad metro station, was played before the Delhi High Court in February last year.

A bench of Justices S Muralidhar and Talwant Singh had decided to play the video during hearing a plea seeking lodging of FIRs and arrests of those involved in the violence over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. The court had reportedly asked the Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, to advise the police commissioner on lodging of FIRs relating to the alleged hate speeches delivered by three BJP leaders – Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur, and Parvesh Verma. 

The bench had also asked SG Mehta and Deputy Commissioner of Police (crime branch) if they had seen the videos and when the bench was informed that they didn’t come across the video of Mishra’s speech, Justice Muralidhar had said, “There are so many TVs in your office, how can a police officer say that he hasn’t watched the videos? I’m really appalled by the state of affairs of Delhi Police”, reported LiveLaw.

CJP had also started an online petition appealing to the Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde, to hold Kapil Mishra accountable for raising slogans like “shoot the traitor” and prosecuting him.

The order may be read here:


After 17 months in jail, two accused get bail in the Delhi violence 2020 case
Delhi Violence: Courts call Delhi Police’s investigation ‘callous, inefficient, indolent and lackadaisical’
Delhi violence: HC denies bail to two accused based on CCTV camera footage
CJP’s online petition to CJI: Hold Kapil Mishra accountable for instigating the Delhi violence
Videos of hate speech by Kapil Mishra played before Delhi HC
Delhi Violence case: Court discharges 3 accused citing shoddy investigation 



Related Articles