Delhi riots: Missing glasses help court decide bail plea

While granting bail to Saiyad Iftikhar on a personal bond of Rs 15,000, justice Suresh Kait said that it is not in dispute that he had a weak eyesight (-3.75) and he was wearing spectacles when he was arrested even though the CCTV footage did not show him wearing glasses.

The Delhi high court has granted bail to an accused in one of the cases of riots in north east Delhi’s Bhajanpura area, on the grounds that even though he had a weak eyesight, he was not wearing glasses in the CCTV footage submitted by the police to establish his presence at the spot as well as the absence of call detail records as corroborating evidence.

Communal riots had broken out in the city in February this year claiming 53 lives and leaving over 400 injured. (AFP file photo)

While granting bail to Saiyad Iftikhar on a personal bond of Rs 15,000, justice Suresh Kait said that it is not in dispute that he had a weak eyesight (-3.75) and he was wearing spectacles when he was arrested even though the CCTV footage did not show him wearing glasses.

“It is not in dispute that petitioner’s eye sight is weak (-3.75) and when he was arrested he was wearing spectacles. However, petitioner was arrested on the basis of CCTV footage along with co accused Ali Hasan but admitted fact is that in CCTV footage petitioner is not wearing spectacles.

“The alleged incident is dated February 24 at 21:31.50 hour. Thus, it cannot be believed that a person having such weak eye sight would have clear vision at night without spectacles. Moreover, CDR is not on record, whereby it could have been established that the petitioner was available at the site,” the judge said in his order of November 12.

According to the plea filed through advocates Mehmood Pracha and Jatin Bhatt, Iftikhar had been falsely and maliciously implicated in the FIR registered at Bhajanpura police station for rioting, unlawful assembly and arson. He has been in custody since April 11.

Appearing for the accused, advocate Pracha contended that his client was arrested for alleged arson, looting, and damaging of shops, despite no public and police witnesses. He said his client’s name has also not been mentioned in the FIR.

He submitted that the only basis of arrest is the alleged sighting of his client on CCTV footage as well as certain undisclosed secret information. Challenging the orders of the trial court which had dismissed his bail pleas, Pracha stated that no recoveries have been made from Iftikhar and the charge sheet in the case has already been filed.

The court after hearing the contentions, said, “Keeping in view the above facts and the fact that petitioner is in judicial custody (JC) since April 11, therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner (ifitkhar) deserves bail”.

Communal riots had broken out in the city in February this year claiming 53 lives and leaving over 400 injured.