Court acquits four of vandalism charges in 2020 Delhi riots case

A Delhi court acquitted four men accused of vandalism during the 2020 riots, citing inconsistent police testimonies and lack of credible evidence.

NEW DELHI

The case stems from two complaints related to an incident of violence on February 25, 2020. (Shutterstock)

A Delhi court has acquitted four men accused of vandalism during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, holding that the testimonies of police witnesses were inconsistent with the case record.

Accused Sumit Kumar, Anuj, Rahul and Sachin were acquitted of all charges, the court held.

Passing the order on Tuesday, additional sessions judge Parveen Singh of Karkardooma courts observed that it would be “dangerous” to rely on the testimonies of two police witnesses — based on whose statements the prosecution had built its entire case — as their accounts were contradicted by the investigation record and other evidence.

The case stems from two complaints related to an incident of violence on February 25, 2020. The complainant in the first instance, Wajid, alleged that a mob set afire his autorickshaw; the other complainant, Shamshad, alleged that rioters vandalised and set afire his shop. Both incidents allegedly took place in Karawal Nagar.

While the prosecution produced CCTV footage to identify the accused, its case rested primarily on the statements of two police witnesses, head constable Mithilesh and assistant sub-inspector Junaid, who told the court that they witnessed a mob assaulting an autorickshaw driver and subsequently setting both the vehicle and a nearby shop on fire.

Based on these allegations, an FIR was registered and the four accused were charged by the court with rioting, unlawful assembly, disobedience of an order promulgated by a public servant, and mischief causing damage.

However, the trial exposed significant weaknesses in the prosecution’s case. The court noted that Wajid, the complainant in the autorickshaw incident, could not be produced as a witness. Meanwhile, Shamshad, whose shop was allegedly attacked, testified that he was not present when the incident occurred and was, therefore, unable to identify any of the persons involved.

The CCTV footage also failed to support the prosecution’s narrative.

Judge Singh observed that even if the footage was accepted as genuine, it did not depict either of the specific incidents for which charges had been framed against the accused. The court also questioned the inconsistencies regarding the location of the alleged offences.

While the two police witnesses claimed they saw the autorickshaw being set on fire at Karawal Nagar Chowk, investigating officers (IOs) in the case testified that the incident took place on Pushta Road, around 1.5 kilometres away.

“The testimonies of both these witnesses are completely falsified by what had been deposed by the IOs about the place of the incident,” the court said.

The court concluded that the police witnesses were not credible and that the remaining evidence fell short of proving the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Acquitting the accused of all charges, the court underlined, “I find that prosecution witness 6 and prosecution witness 7 are not credible witnesses and it will be dangerous to rely upon their testimonies”.