A Delhi Sessions Court judge, Pulastya Pramachala (Karkardooma courts) pulled up Delhi Police for presenting irrelevant witnesses for examination in a 2020 Delhi riots case. The judge said he was issuing “last warning for prosecution to wake up”. The court was conducting trial of accused Noor Mohammad in SC No. 242/21 in FIR no. 221/20 filed by Khajuri Khas Police Station.
“Despite repeated directions given, in the past in a number of cases, for the prosecution to go through the record and to check, if everything is well with the record, such pain was not taken in this case, either by ld. Prosecutor or by the IO. One more last opportunity has been sought by the IO as well as representative of ld. Prosecutor,” the court said in an order.
It was observed by the court that charges were not framed in respect of complaint made by witness presented before the court. Moreover, wrong date of incident was mentioned in the charges.
“After this incident, no more such mishappenings shall be taken leniently by this court and this would be the last warning for the prosecution to wake up. At the cost of repetition of previous directions, it is again reminded that before obtaining summons for any witness, a duty has been cast upon the IO and the ld. Prosecutor to ensure relevance of such witness in the case and apparently it was not so done. Therefore, they must take care in future,” the court warned the prosecution.
The court set November 29 as next date for hearing the case and directed the prosecution to take all requisite steps before that.
The order may be read here:
Delhi Police pulled up several times
In the past as well Sessions courts have pulled up the Police for not doing their jobs effectively. In November 2021, a Delhi court ordered the Delhi Police to investigate if a “deliberate attempt” had been made to shield five men, accused of being part of a mob that looted a Muslim man’s house and a medical store during the North East Delhi violence. The court said that the “accused were not discharged because the incident did not take place or that they were falsely implicated.”
In October 2021, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) in Delhi imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on the Delhi Police to be paid to the accused persons for causing delay in moving an application regarding segregation of complaint that caused “undue harassment” to the accused persons who were in judicial custody. The Magistrate pulled up the police and ruled that repeated directions in the communal violence case have “fallen on deaf ears” of the senior police officials. This order was later stayed by the Sessions Court.
On September 28,2021 the ASJ Vinod Yadav reprimanded Delhi Police for “sorry state affairs” in that it has not begun investigation in a riots case in which it is alleged that certain accused gave a call to violence over loudspeakers, to attack people from the other community.
On September 22, 2021 ASJ Yadav hauled up the Police and dropped arson charges against 10 people who were alleged to have damaged shops during the communal violence. He pulled up the Police for not registering the FIR on time despite the fact that the complaint of the alleged incident had reached the authorities on time. “No explanation in this regard has been provided by the investigating agency in the entire chargesheet,” said ASJ Yadav.
On September 2, 2021 ASJ Yadav discharged three accused- Shah Alam (26), Rashid Saifi (23), Shadab (26) from the case FIR number 93 of 2020, on the basis of two complaints alleging that a shop was burnt, attacked and looted during the violence. “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,” he had said. The court observed that the case appeared to have been solved merely by filing this charge sheet “without any real effort being made to trace out eye witnesses, real accused persons and technical evidence”.
On March 23, ASJ Yadav had granted bail to one Amit Goswami accused of vandalising, looting and setting on fire a shop in Bhajanpura main market area by allegedly being a part of a riotous mob. While the bail was granted on grounds of parity, the court had questioned the credibility of the police witnesses while observing that no PCR call was made by them on the date of witnessing the incident, “Being police officials, what stopped them from reporting the matter then and there in the PS or to bring the same in the knowledge of higher police officers,” he questioned.
It is pertinent to note here that ASJ Yadav who reprimanded Delhi Police time and again, was transferred by the High Court soon after.
Irshad Ahmed, an associate of jailed Tahir Hussain (who is the main accused in UAPA FIR 59), was granted bail by the High Court on October 7, 2020. Justice Suresh Kait noted that the police constables did not make any complaint on the date of the incident (February 25), and filed the FIR only on February 28. “Thus, the said witnesses seem to be planted one”, he observed.
Evidently, the Delhi Police and its investigations in the Delhi Violence cases seem to have fallen through. The rampant arrests made during the riots, innocents languishing in jail for months, shoddy investigation, ‘planted witnesses’ were some facets that unraveled during the many hearings that have taken place in the last 2 years.
Related:
Delhi Violence case: Court discharges 3 accused citing shoddy investigation
Delhi Violence: Courts call Delhi Police’s investigation ‘callous, inefficient, indolent and lackadaisical’
Delhi violence: HC transfers Judge who criticised Delhi Police’s investigation
Delhi Police fail to start investigating case, even though accused called for riots over loud speaker!