A Delhi court acquitted nine men accused in a 2020 Delhi riots case, citing unreliable and contradictory witness testimonies, raising questions about the investigation and evidence presented.
Key Points
- Nine men acquitted in 2020 Delhi riots case due to lack of specific and reliable witness testimonies.
- The court found contradictions and false statements regarding the location and timing of incidents.
- Investigating officer recorded the wrong date of the incident, further undermining the prosecution's case.
- Witness testimonies regarding the attack on a news channel vehicle were found to be false and contradictory to police reports.
- The court deemed it unsafe to convict the accused based on the unreliable testimonies provided.
A court has acquitted nine men in a case related to the 2020 Delhi riots, saying that the testimonies cannot be relied upon in the case as they lacked specificity and were general in nature.
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh was hearing the case against nine persons -- Shah Alam, Rashid Saifi, Mohammad Shadab, Habib, Irfan, Suhail, Salim alias Ashu, Irshad, and Azhar alias Sonu -- who were arrested in a loot and arson case linked to the northeast Delhi riots.
In an order dated March 30, the court said, "Testimonies are general in nature, lack specificity especially in view of the fact that these witnesses have deposed falsely with regard to the place of incident...I find that it will be unsafe to rely upon the testimonies of these witnesses to convict the accused."
The accused were arrested in the case registered at Dayalpur police station in connection with the vandalization of an Innova Crysta car, the burning of a motorcycle, the looting of street vendors' carts, and the arson of a shop named 'Royal Motors' during the riots which erupted in Chand Bagh area of the national capital.
Contradictions in Witness Accounts
Noting contradictions in the testimonies of eyewitnesses, the court said that the investigating officer in the case recorded the wrong date of incident as February 24, but the incident happened on February 25, 2020.
"The witness was so categorical and insistent about the fact that a wrong date of incident had been projected by the police, that he had approached the DCP of the area and gave a representation that IO had wrongly recorded the date of incident," the judge said.
Regarding an attack on a news channel vehicle (Innova Crysta), the court noted that the driver and passenger identified a location and time that completely contradicted the police's site plan and the testimonies of police witnesses.
"The testimonies of Constable Gyan Singh and Head Constable Sunil with regard to this incident are completely found to be false," the judge stated, noting that the incident actually happened at a place far from where the police claimed.
The court noted that since the primary witnesses had deposed falsely regarding the timing and location of major incidents, it would be unsafe to rely on their testimonies to convict the accused for other alleged acts of rioting.
"I find that it will be unsafe to rely upon the testimonies of these witnesses to convict the accused. I accordingly find that the accused are entitled to a benefit of doubt," the court said, ordering the discharge of their sureties and cancellation of bail bonds.
