Delhi court convicts AAP legislator Akhilesh Pati Tripathi in 2020 beating case

The court, however, acquitted AAP legislator Akhilesh Pati Tripathi for other offences under the Scheduled castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

A Delhi court on Saturday convicted Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Akhilesh Pati Tripathi for voluntarily causing hurt to someone in a case filed against him in 2020 for allegedly beating and using words prohibited under Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA from Model Town, Akhilesh Pati Tripathi. (File Photo)

“The prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused Akhilesh Pati Tripathi beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under Section 323 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt) and he is convicted for the same”, special judge Geetanjli Goel said in the order.

The court, however, acquitted the Model Town MLA for other offences under Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Scheduled castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. “ The court said he has been acquitted of the offences under Section 341(wrongful restraint), 506(1)(criminal intimidation) of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

A first information report (FIR) was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by one Sanjeev Kumar wherein he stated that on February 7, 2020 he along with his friend Raj Kishore was stopped by Tripathi at Lal Bagh. Kumar stated in the complaint that Tripathi had beaten him with heavy objects and used words prohibited under the SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act in order to tarnish his and his parents’ image.

The court after going through the statements of the witnesses and other documentary evidence noted that both Sanjeev Kumar and Akhilesh Pati Tripathi had sustained injuries in the altercation that had happened between them because of which they had sustained simple injuries.

The court also noted that the complaint was not filed on the date of the incident i.e., February 7, but was filed on February 10 and there is no cogent reason for the delay and thereafter the FIR was filed on March 1.

Charges under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act had also been framed against Tripathi during the course of hearing.

Additional public prosecutor Manish Rawat appearing for the state had argued that the words uttered by the accused satisfied the ingredients of Sections 3(1)(r) and (s) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as Tripathi had intentionally insulted or humiliated Sanjeev Kumar as he was the son of an ex-councillor and belonged to SC category and the words were uttered in the presence of independent witness.

Counsel appearing for Tripathi opposed it stating that Sanjeev Kumar, who hailed from a well to do family is claiming protection of a law which is meant for weaker sections which he was not, claiming that the alleged intimidation did not fall under the Act. It was further highlighted that there was no allegations made by Sanjeev Kumar that Tripathi tried to intimidate or humiliate him as he belonged to a particular caste.

“It is difficult to believe the case of the prosecution that the accused had uttered any caste related remarks against the complainant, much less to show any intention to humiliate or intimidate the complainant as he belonged to Scheduled Caste,” the court observed after going through the statements of witnesses and hearing the contentions of both the parties.

“It cannot be discounted that the incident had taken place and the MLC of the complainant shows simple injuries. The MLC of the accused also shows simple injuries but on that basis, the offence committed by the accused cannot be washed away. In view of the same, the offence under Section 323 IPC would be made out against the accused,” the court further noted.