A man walks past the charred remains of vehicles set ablaze by rioters at a parking lot during the anti-CAA protests, at Shiv Vihar area of Northeast Delhi. File
| Photo Credit: PTI

New Delhi:

A local court has ordered the registration of an FIR against a Delhi Police officer for alleged hate crime during the February 2020 communal riots in the city’s northeast.

The court also deprecated the conduct of the investigating officer (IO) for failing to inquire about the alleged role of former MLA Kapil Mishra in the rioting incident connected to the matter, saying he “tried to cover up the allegations” against the BJP leader.

Judicial Magistrate Udbhav Kumar Jain was hearing an application under Section 156 (3) of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), seeking the court’s directions to register an FIR against the-then Jyoti Nagar SHO and others.

Power under this section can be exercised by the magistrate to direct the police to conduct an investigation in respect of a cognisable offence.

The complainant, one Mohammed Wasim, claimed that he was among five people allegedly assaulted and forced to sing the national anthem during the communal riots on February 24.

A clip that had become widely circulated on social media purported to show five Muslim men being beaten up by policemen and forced to sing the national anthem and “Vande Mataram”, the national song.

In an order dated January 18, the court said, “Clearly, the SHO police station Jyoti Nagar, Tomar (complete name with post not provided) and other unknown police officials engaged themselves in hate crimes against the complainant or victim and they cannot be protected under the garb of sanction as alleged offences committed by them cannot be said to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of their official duty.” It directed that an FIR be registered against the-then SHO under sections 295 A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 342 (wrongful confinement) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

“The current SHO is directed to depute a responsible officer not below the rank of inspector to conduct investigation in the present matter and role of other unknown police officials involved in the commission of alleged offences can be ascertained during investigation,” the court added.

It noted that an action taken report had been filed by the IO in the matter that merely denied the complainant’s allegations.

The court said the action taken report did not mention any substantive steps that had been taken for conducting a preliminary inquiry and remained silent regarding the CCTV camera footage of the alleged incident.

It said, “Thus, inquiry pertaining to alleged acts or offences against the complainant has not been conducted properly.” The also court noted Wasim’s claim about identifying Mishra as leading the riotous mob.

“The complainant saw that the personnel of Delhi Police were fully supporting the alleged accused Kapil Mishra. Policemen were also pelting stones on the Muslims, and firing bullets. Due to the above attack, the protesters, women, and children escaped from there to save their lives and thereafter, a majority of rioters led by Kapil Mishra also went towards Chand Bagh shouting slogans,” the court noted.

Regarding the allegations against Mishra, the court said it appeared that the “IO was more concerned about the police officials and either he failed to make inquiry against the alleged accused No 3 (Mishra) or he tried to cover up the allegations against the said accused and the action taken report was completely silent qua him”.

“The Constitution guarantees equal protection of law and equality before law and no citizen of India enjoys any special treatment from the rule of law. The alleged accused No 3 is in public eyes and is prone to more scrutiny; such persons in the society direct the course or mood of the public at large and thus, responsible behaviour within the ambit of the Constitution is expected from such persons,” the court observed.

It, however, directed the complainant to approach the special court which was competent to try offences against former or sitting MLAs.

Last July, Delhi High Court transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) a case related to the death of a 23-year-old man who was seen in the video being purportedly assaulted and forced to sing the national anthem during the riots.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court on Monday told Sharjeel Imam — an accused in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots case — that it has not stayed the trial proceedings in the sedition case linked to his alleged inflammatory speeches at Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia area against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

“There is no stay, the trial would obviously proceed. If the trial court comes to a conclusion that enough material exists, it will proceed to frame charges,” clarified the Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri when Imam’s counsel pointed out that the trial court had proceeded to frame charges against his client.

The Delhi High Court was hearing Imam’s plea seeking quashing of sedition and hate speech charges against him under Sections 124A and 153A of the now-repealed Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The matter was deferred after an adjournment was sought on behalf of Delhi Police.

Last week, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea filed by Sharjeel Imam seeking bail in an alleged larger conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.

It said that Imam, accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), should not have moved a writ petition directly before the apex court when his bail plea is pending adjudication before the Delhi High Court. However, the top court asked the Delhi High Court to hear Imam’s bail plea on the date fixed and decide it expeditiously.

In his appeal filed before the Delhi HC, the former Jawaharlal Nehru University student and activist has challenged the trial court order, which had previously denied him bail, following his arrest in August 2020 in connection with the case. He has been in custody since January 2020, facing multiple FIRs related to the violence.

According to the police, Imam made the alleged inflammatory speeches in Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi on December 13, 2019, and in Aligarh Muslim University, Uttar Pradesh on January 16, 2020.

JNU scholars and activists Imam and Umar Khalid are among the nearly dozen people reportedly involved in the alleged larger conspiracy linked to the Delhi riots of 2020, as per the Delhi Police. Imam and Khalid are facing charges in connection with making inflammatory speeches which allegedly fuelled the violence, as per the police.

The riots broke out in the national capital in February 2020 as clashes between the anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) and pro-CAA protesters took a violent turn. The mayhem saw more than 50 people lose their lives, besides leaving over 700 people injured.

The Delhi High Court, on May 29, granted statutory bail to Sharjeel Imam in a sedition case. However, he continued to remain in jail due to his involvement in the larger conspiracy case.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

Shahrukh Pathan, who hogged media spotlight as he pointed a pistol at a policeman and threatened to kill him during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, was granted bail on Saturday. Pathan, however, will remain in jail as he is an accused in another rioting case.

Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat pronounced the order on a bail plea by Pathan, who was accused of being part of a riotous mob that inflicted gunshot injury to a person. The alleged incident happened near Maujpur Chowk on February 24, 2020.

“In the overall facts and circumstances of the case where accused Shahrukh Pathan has been in custody since April 3, 2020, the (case is at the) stage of the prosecution evidence, where public witness and injured Rohit Shukla has been examined and relevant remaining witnesses are all police officials, and all other co-accused persons are on bail, the present bail application of accused Shahrukh Pathan is allowed,” ASJ Rawat said.

The court directed Pathan to furnish a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties of the like amount as condition for bail. The court said Pathan did not shoot victim Rohit Shukla but was claimed to have been present in the mob that shot him.

It further said, “The court is also conscious of the fact that accused Shahrukh Pathan is also involved in another rioting case (FIR No.51/2020 Police station-Jafrabad) where he is stated to have made an attack on the life of a police official, however, the said case will be dealt with on its own facts.” During the proceedings, the public prosecutor said Pathan had been frequently found “misbehaving” with the jail staff and filing “false and fabricated applications” against them.

To this, the judge said, “The court is conscious of the fact that the conduct of the accused in this case before he was arrested and even during trial, during judicial custody, has been atrocious. However, it remains a fact that he has been in judicial custody since April 3, 2020.” The Jafrabad police station had registered an FIR against Pathan and others under various IPC provisions, including rioting and attempt to murder, following which charges were framed against them in December 2021.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)