Delhi riots: Tahir Hussain discharged of arson charge in one case

The court, however, remanded the case back to the chief metropolitan magistrate (CMM) for trial of other offences

A Delhi court on Wednesday cleared former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain and nine others of arson in a case arising from the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots. However, Hussain will continue to be tried under other offences including those of rioting and damage of public property, the court said.

Delhi riots: Tahir Hussain discharged of arson charge in one case

Additional sessions judge Pulastya Pramachala said that by no stretch of imagination, the commission of the offence under Section 436 (arson) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was shown and discharged the accused of the offence. “It is well apparent that this section was added in this case without due application of mind. Hence, all the accused persons are discharged for offence under Section 436 IPC,” the court said.

The court, however, remanded the case back to the chief metropolitan magistrate (CMM) for trial of other offences including those under Indian Penal Code sections 147 (rioting), 148, 149 (unlawful assembly), 427, 120B of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

It is pertinent to mention that section 436 of the IPC is punishable with life imprisonment or with imprisonment of a term which may extend to ten years and with fine. All offences having a punishment of more than seven years are triable by the sessions’ court. Those less than seven years are tried by the magistrate’s court.

In the present case, since the accused have been discharged of the offence which entails a punishment less than seven years, the court remanded the matter back to the CMM.

The case in question was registered at the Dayalpur police station after a PCR call was received on February 25, 2020 alleging that about 100 people were stand on the terrace of Tahir Hussain’s house carrying petrol bombs and were throwing them on the property of the Hindu community.

The complainant, Jai Bhagwan, contended that due to the riots, he suffered a loss of ₹35,000.

Arguing for the former councillor, his lawyer said that no offence of arson is being made against his client. Accepting his contentions, the court said that except for general information regarding the incidents that took place during the riots, “one cannot get any idea as to what particular incident this particular case was registered and a charge sheet was filed”.