The Delhi High Court has rejected the bail petition of Shahrukh Pathan whose video wielding a gun and running towards Head constable Deepak Dahiya went viral during the Delhi violence of February 2020. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait said that the pictures and videos of the incident have shaken the conscience of the court and stated that whether or not Pathan intended to kill Dahiya, it is hard to believe that he had no knowledge that his act may harm anyone present at the spot.
It was stated by Head Constable Deepak Dahiya that on February 24, 2020, he was with his team between Jaffrabad Metro Station and Maujpur Chowk when one person (the petitioner), leading the agitated crowd and brandishing pistol in his hand, came running towards him and fired 3-4 rounds of shots towards other people. He aimed the pistol at the constable’s head who dodged the bullet but Pathan still kept shooting at the public. Accordingly, the FIR was lodged under sections 147/148/149/186/216/307/353 of the IPC and certain sections of the Arms Act.
He was detained on March 3, 2020, and has been in custody since. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out the delay of over 50 hours in filing the FIR. He further submitted that he has made a scapegoat/ poster boy of the riots and complainant has become the symbol of bravery before the media person. On the charge of attempt to murder invoked against him, he stated that he did not shoot at the constable but shot on the side and had no intention of killing him. He further contended that irrespective of how many criminal cases are pending against an accused, it cannot form the basis to refuse the bail.
The prosecutor opposed the bail stating that there are video clips as well as a few photographs showing petitioner heading the group of mobs, holding his pistol in hand and walking towards the complainant and also firing the pistol shots. Further Forensic reports stated that the cartridges seized from the spot have been fired from the weapon recovered from Pathan’s house.
At the outset the court mentioned that some serious allegations were made by the petitioner in the petition against the Government of India, Ministers and Judge of this Court. the court deprecated this and stated “the Bar is suggested to not make such claims until and unless supported with factual and material evidence in a particular case.”
The court stated that the “role attributed to the petitioner is not confined to participation in the mob of rioters but of heading the large crowd, holding a pistol in hand and releasing open fire shots. The video clipping and pictures played before this Court have shaken the conscience of this Court how petitioner could take law and order in his hands.” The court stated that whether or not he had the intention to kill the Constable, it is hard to believe that he had no knowledge that his act may harm anyone present at the spot.
The court denied him bail while observing that the petitioner has not denied his involvement in the incident and the picture speaks volumes about his involvement. The court said that keeping in mind the gravity of offence, it was not inclined to grant bail and dismissed the petition accordingly.
The order may be read here: