Former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain has approached the Delhi high court challenging his conviction and life sentence in connection with the murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) official Ankit Sharma during the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots, alleging that the investigation was tainted from the outset and aimed at implicating him to assuage public anger.
In his appeal challenging the trial court’s July 13 and July 31 orders, which is likely to come up before the high court next week, Hussain, through advocate Rajiv Mohan, alleged that the first information report (FIR) was ante-dated, ante-timed, based on a fabricated complaint and that no meaningful investigation was conducted until March 2020, when he was arrested in another case.
The appeal further alleged that witnesses were planted, statements of genuine eyewitnesses were manipulated, and the actual perpetrators were not brought to book.
Also Read: 2020 riots: HC seeks Delhi Police stand on appeals in IB official murder case
The appeal filed on August 24, added that the verdict convicting him is unsustainable in law, based on surmises and conjectures, unsupported by evidence and has been undertaken on the basis of incorrect appreciation of facts.
“However, to the extent of conviction of the Appellant, the Impugned Judgment is completely erroneous and based on mis appreciation of facts and incorrect application of law. Further, the Ld. Trial Court has also completely brushed aside the fact that there has been a clear manipulation in the registration of the FIR with the complaint on record having been disavowed by the complainant, and the FIR is ante-dated and ante-timed,” the appeal stated.
{{/usCountry}}“However, to the extent of conviction of the Appellant, the Impugned Judgment is completely erroneous and based on mis appreciation of facts and incorrect application of law. Further, the Ld. Trial Court has also completely brushed aside the fact that there has been a clear manipulation in the registration of the FIR with the complaint on record having been disavowed by the complainant, and the FIR is ante-dated and ante-timed,” the appeal stated.
{{/usCountry}}“Ld. The trial court failed to appreciate that PW13 and PW14 are planted witnesses and were made a witness only to strengthen a false FIR against the Appellant. Thus believed a manipulated and targeted investigation which was carried out against the Appellant. Further, the Ld. trial Court also failed to consider the positive evidence that favoured the Appellant and corroborated his defence.”
The trial court on July 13 convicted Hussain and four others for Sharma’s murder, holding that Hussain, along with an “armed” mob, had carried out a “savage” and “relentless” attack. It had however acquitted six other accused.
On July 31, the trial court sentenced Hussain, along with four others including Nazim and Kasim to life, ruling that while the crime was “horrendous” and “sickening”, the prosecution had failed to prove that the convicts were beyond the possibility of reform. The court rejected the Delhi Police’s plea for capital punishment.
The court observed that although the murder fell within the “rarest of the rare” category on account of its brutality, the prosecution had not established that the convicts’ continued existence in prison “would pose a menace to society”.
On August 12, the high court had issued notice in an appeal filed by two persons– Nazim and Kasim against the same orders and fixed December 2 as the next date of hearing.