After 17 years, court acquits man over hoax bomb call against ex-PM
Mahesh had given false information regarding the “blowing up of the PM" on Independence Day to the police on July 19, 2005.
Delhi 17 years after an FIR was registered against him, a Delhi court has acquitted a man accused of giving false information to police over a phone call regarding the “blowing up” of the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, saying that the prosecution has not been able to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
According to the prosecution, Mahesh had dialled the police emergency number 100 from the PCO booth and given false information regarding the “blowing up of the Prime Minister” on Independence Day to the police on July 19, 2005.
The New Usmanpur police station subsequently registered an FIR, and charges were framed against Mahesh in December 2010.
Metropolitan Magistrate Vipul Sandwar cleared Mahesh, who was charged with the offences under sections 507( criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication) and 182 (false information with the intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person) of the Indian Penal Code.
“...The prosecution has not been able to establish beyond reasonable doubt that accused Mahesh has committed offences under sections 182 and 507 of the IPC and is found not guilty in the present case…,” the court said in its judgment of April 13.
He said the prime witness in the case, the PCO/STD booth owner Lalit Ahmed, was “unsettled” during his cross-examination, and he stated that he was not present in his PCO when the call was made.
{{/usCountry}}He said the prime witness in the case, the PCO/STD booth owner Lalit Ahmed, was “unsettled” during his cross-examination, and he stated that he was not present in his PCO when the call was made.
{{/usCountry}}“Since, prosecution witness 2 (Ahmed) was not present at the time when the call was made anything deposed by him would be like hearsay and hence, not admissible. Accordingly, the prosecution has failed to prove the offence punishable under section 182 of the IPC,” the magistrate said.
{{/usCountry}}“Since, prosecution witness 2 (Ahmed) was not present at the time when the call was made anything deposed by him would be like hearsay and hence, not admissible. Accordingly, the prosecution has failed to prove the offence punishable under section 182 of the IPC,” the magistrate said.
{{/usCountry}}The court further said the evidence brought on record was insufficient to link the accused to the commission of the crime, and the prosecution had failed to establish the identity of the accused as the person who had made the false call to the police.
{{/usCountry}}The court further said the evidence brought on record was insufficient to link the accused to the commission of the crime, and the prosecution had failed to establish the identity of the accused as the person who had made the false call to the police.
{{/usCountry}}“The prosecution has failed to establish that accused Mahesh was the person making the call from the PCO shop of PW2 and therefore, in the absence of identification of accused, the offence punishable under section 507 of the IPC is not proved,” it said.
