A Delhi Court has convicted nine persons in the 2020 Delhi riots case. The court said that the accused persons were part of an unruly mob whose object was to cause maximum damage to the properties of persons belonging to the Hindu Community.
This matter pertains to rioting, arson and vandalism in the Gokulpuri area during riots.
'Unruly mob, which was guided by communal feelings..'
While passing the judgement, the court said that the accused persons, in this case, did become part of an unruly mob, which was guided by communal feelings and was having a common object to cause maximum damage to the properties of persons belonging to the Hindu community.
The court directed to take the convicts into custody and send them to judicial custody. The matter has been listed on March 29 for filing of affidavits by the accused and the prosecution.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Pulastaya Pramachala convicted Mohd Shahnawaz alias Shanu, Mohd Shoaib alias Chhutwa, Shahrukh, Rashid alias Raja, Azad, Ashraf Ali, Parvez, Md Faisaland Rashid alias Monu under sections related to rioting, theft, mischief by fire, destroying properties by setting them on fire and unlawful assembly.
Charges proved beyond doubt: Judge
"I find that charges levelled against all the accused persons in this case are proved beyond doubt. Hence, accused persons are convicted for offences punishable under Section 147/148/380/427/436 read with Section 149 IPC as well as under Section 188 IPC," ASJ Pramachala said in the judgement passed on March 13.
"On the basis of the assessment of the evidence in this case and further reasoning, I am convinced with the version of prosecution against the accused persons. I find it well established that all the named accused persons, in this case, did become part of an unruly mob, which was guided by communal feelings and was having a common object to cause maximum damage to the properties of persons belonging to the Hindu community," the judge said.
Special public prosecutor DK Bhatia represented Delhi police in the matter.
Brief facts of the present case are that on February 29, 2020 FIR was registered at Gokalpuri police station on a written complaint one by Rekha Sharma.
Horrors of Feb 24, 2020 incident
The complainant alleged that on February 24, 2020 at about 1 to 2 PM, when she was present at her house at Chaman Park, Shiv Vihar Tiraha Road, Delhi, there was stone pelting in her street.
There was a mob in the street, which was trying to break open the gate of her house. She made a call to her husband, who was on his duty. Her husband returned home and took her away to a safe place and locked the gate.
It was further alleged that during the night intervening between February 24-25, the mob broke open the rear gate of her aforesaid house and robbed the goods lying therein. They also damaged the house and set on fire its room on the upper floor, the complaint stated.
During further investigation, efforts were made to identify other persons involved in the crime with the help of CCTV cameras, viral footages on social media and with the help of public witnesses.
The Investigation Officer (IO) came to know that the accused persons were involved in the incident of the present case namely Mohd Shahnawaz, Mohd Shoaib, Shahrukh, Rashid, Azad, Ashraf Ali, Parvej, Mohd. Faisal and Rashid, were arrested by Crime Branch.
IO obtained permission for the interrogation of aforesaid accused persons and after their interrogation, IO formally arrested them in the present case.
It was argued by the advocate Z Babar Chauhan, counsel for Shahnawaz and other accused that Atul Kumar and Rekha Sharma were relied upon as eyewitnesses, but they did not identify any accused.
It was further argued that Head Constable Hari Babu could not identify the same accused, taking the plea that due to a lapse of longtime, he could not identify them. But subsequently, he identified them, which shows that he was tutored.
HC Vipin Kumar remains the lone witness to identify the accused, but he could not answer any questions in his cross-examination, Chauhan argued.
On identification of the accused, the court said, the foremost question is whether accused persons named in this case were also involved in the aforesaid incident, as memberof the above-mentioned unlawful assembly.
"I find it well established that all the named accused persons, in this case, did become part of an unruly mob ..." the judge said.
