A Delhi court acquitted four men accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case, citing unreliable police testimonies and discrepancies in evidence, raising questions about the investigation.
Key Points
- Delhi court acquits four men accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case due to unreliable police testimonies.
- The court found discrepancies between police testimonies and investigation records regarding the location of the alleged incidents.
- Complainants in the case could not be produced during the trial or failed to identify the accused.
- CCTV footage presented by the prosecution did not pertain to the specific incidents for which charges were framed.
- The court deemed the police witnesses not credible, leading to the acquittal of all four accused.
A Delhi court has acquitted four men accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case, saying it would be "dangerous" to rely on the testimonies of two police personnel as their versions were contradicted by the investigation record and other evidence.
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh was hearing the case against Sumit Kumar, Anuj, Rahul and Sachin in a case related to the alleged burning of an auto-rickshaw and vandalising and setting ablaze a shop in Karawal Nagar during the riots.
Court Finds Police Testimonies Unreliable
In an order dated May 19, the court said, "I find that PW6 and PW7 (police officers) are not credible witnesses and it will be dangerous to rely upon their testimonies and find for the prosecution against the accused. I accordingly find that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused."
According to the prosecution, complainant Wazid had alleged that rioters set his auto-rickshaw on fire on February 25, 2020, while another complainant, Shamshad, alleged that his shop was vandalised and torched by rioters.
Discrepancies in Evidence Highlighted
The prosecution claimed CCTV footage helped identify the accused and relied mainly on the testimonies of police personnel H C Mithilesh and ASI Junaid, who claimed to have witnessed a mob attacking an auto driver and torching the vehicle and shop.
An FIR was registered at the Karawal Nagar police station and charges of rioting, unlawful assembly, disobedience to an order duly promulgated by a public servant and mischief causing damage were framed against all the accused.
The court, however, found serious discrepancies in the evidence and noted that complainant Wazid could not be produced during the trial. It also observed that Shamshad had said that the incident at his shop occurred in his absence and he could not identify any person involved in the rioting or arson.
CCTV Footage Deemed Irrelevant
"Even if the electronic evidence which has been produced by the prosecution in the form of CCTV footage is accepted to be true, the CCTV footage does not pertain to any of the incidents on the basis of which charges have been framed in this case," the judge said.
The court further noted that while the police witnesses claimed they saw the burning of the auto at Karawal Nagar Chowk, investigation records showed the actual location was about 1.5 km away on Pushta Road.
"The testimonies of both these witnesses are completely falsified by what had been deposed by the IOs (investigating officers) about the place of the incident," the court said.
The court subsequently acquitted the four accused of all charges.
