Police challenge ₹25k fine imposed in Delhi riots case

On July 13, additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav dismissed the police’s plea challenging the order of the metropolitan magistrate that ordered registration of FIR in the complaint by one Mohammad Nasir, who was shot during the riots in North Ghonda, on February 24, 2020.

The Delhi Police has moved the Delhi high court against a trial court’s order that imposed ₹25,000 fine on the force, and called its probe into a north east Delhi riots case “farcical” and “callous”.

The matter will now be heard on July 28. (Biplov Bhuyan/ HT Archive)

On July 13, additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav dismissed the police’s plea challenging the order of the metropolitan magistrate that ordered registration of FIR in the complaint by one Mohammad Nasir, who was shot during the riots in North Ghonda, on February 24, 2020.

The judge said that the fine will have to submitted to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a week. The judge said the petitioner, SHO of the Bhajanpura police station, and his supervising officers, have “miserably failed” in their statutory duties in this case.

Challenging this order, city police have stated that the court did not give a chance to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) to justify his stand before imposing the cost, violating the principles of natural justice.

The police plea also stated that the judge failed to appreciate that imposition of such cost was “not only unwarranted but uncalled for” for the reason that the court did not find the petition as vexatious and that hand imposition of such cost would “seriously affect not only the career of the government officials but would certainly cause serious dent to the reputation of the officers.”

The matter will now be heard on July 28.

Nasir’s complaint was clubbed with an FIR registered for gunshot injuries suffered by six others during the riots.

The court said that the facts produced before it revealed “a shocking state of affairs”, and it was not able to persuade itself about the efficacy and fairness of the investigation carried out in the matter.

The court said when two separate complaints disclosing cognizable offences are filed by two different complainants, there is no provision under which the investigating agency can club such complaints and carry out investigation.