North-east Delhi riot accused gets bail

A Delhi court granted bail to a man accused in two cases related to the north-east Delhi riots, while stating that “the complainants have been made to identify the

A Delhi court granted bail to a man accused in two cases related to the north-east Delhi riots, while stating that “the complainants have been made to identify the accused persons as per their own convenience by the police and he was not seen in the video footage”.

HT Image

Additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav granted bail to Deepak (single name), arrested in connection with the violence that happened under the Shastri Park police station, on a personal bond of ₹20,000.

“Multiple statements of complainants were recorded in the matter from time to time. It was only on June 2 --i.e at the time of arrest of the applicant (Deepak) -- that the complainants were called by the police to the spot and for the first time that they identified him. Whether that identification is enough to connect the accused in the matter is a matter for trial as the complainants have been made to identify the accused persons as per their own convenience by the police,” the judge said in his order on July 29.

Deepak was arrested on June 2 for allegedly being a part of unlawful assembly, rioting and arson.

Appearing for the accused, his counsel had contended that in both cases, the charge sheet had been filed but his client has not been named as an accused. He also contended that there was a delay in lodging the FIR.

On the contrary, the special public prosecutor contended that the call detail records location of the accused has been found to be of the scene of crime. He has been identified by complainant on June 2 --at the time of his arrest -- and he was also identified by constable Amit the same day.

The court also said the identification of the accused by beat constable Amit (single name) is also a “weak kind of evidence”. It noted that the other three accused in the case, who have been released on bail, are from the same locality and till date, no complaint against them has been recorded in any police station regarding them threatening witnesses.