Delhi court grants bail to 12 accused in Turkman Gate violence

A Delhi court granted bail to 12 individuals arrested for violence during a demolition drive, citing lack of evidence and identification of roles.

New Delhi

A total of 20 persons were arrested by the Delhi Police. Of the total, 13 have received bail in total. (Shutterstock)

A Delhi court on Tuesday granted bail to 12 persons held for allegedly indulging in violence during a demolition drive near the Faiz-e-Ilahi mosque in Turkman Gate last month, observing that the prosecution failed to identify or establish specified roles of the persons.

Passing a common order on multiple bail applications, additional sessions judge Bhupinder Singh of Tis Hazari Courts based the order on multiple aspects. The court observed a lack of specific footage highlighting the role of the accused in the unlawful assembly, a lack of any injury that was grievous in nature to the victim police officers, no evidence showing an overt use of social media and an absence of substantive damage to public property.

A total of 20 persons were arrested by the Delhi Police for their alleged involvement in the violence, which took place during an anti-encroachment drive near the Faiz-e-Elahi mosque at the Ramlila Maidan area on the intervening night of January 6 and 7.

ASJ Singh said, “…no specific footage was played before this court during the course of hearing to prima facie demonstrate clear and unmistakeable identification of any of the present applicants as actively participating in stone pelting or committing any specific overt act”.

The court said that the absence of demonstrative identification of the accused became crucial, especially at the stage of deciding on the necessity of further incarceration.

On the prosecution’s submission that the accused persons used WhatsApp as a tool to spread unrest and forward incendiary posts, in order to unlawfully gather a mob to attack police personnel, the court observed that the accused were neither originators nor creators of the said posts and merely forwarded them, absolving them of criminal liability.

ASJ Singh further noted that the prosecution was unable to quantify the damage caused to public property. The court said that only a government vehicle and a public address system were stated to have been damaged, but the act could not be attributed to the accused.

The court also dismissed the police’s argument that since an unlawful assembly with a common object has been established in the present case, each accused will be liable for the acts done in that common object. It was observed that while the principle of vicarious liability was well settled, the same could not be applied here as the identification of the members of the mob was itself under question.

The court said that in such pre-planned demonstration drives, which have the chance of a foreseeable confrontation, good-quality body cameras and strategically placed CCTV surveillance would go a long way in acting in favour of the prosecution, eliminating the scope of doubt in identification.

The court also noted that the accused satisfied the triple test doctrine as there was no possibility of tampering the evidence or influencing witnesses, as most of whom were themselves police officers. The accused were released on a personal bond of ₹50,000 with a surety of the like amount.