New Delhi: The Delhi court has framed riots and burning against nine accused in the case of February 2020 riots, saying that it would be a “miscarriage of justice” to dispose of prosecution cases only because the statement of public witnesses was recorded after delay.
Additional Session Judge Virender Bhat said that the delay in recording the statement of the witnesses by the police was not intentional or denied and was due to the situation in the northeastern region of Delhi during and after alleged riots.
Nine defendants were thought to be part of the assembly that violated the law and caused damage, the properties looted by crores rupees, burned a large number of houses, shops, schools and vehicles on February 25, 2020, according to the police.
It rely on statements of four public witnesses.
The judge took the exception with submission carried out by the defense advisor that public witnesses could not be trusted and planted when their statement was recorded one month after the date of the alleged incident.
The judge noted that there was an atmosphere of terror and trauma for several days even after this riot and public witnesses were scared and reluctant to present their version of the incident before the investigator agent.
“Maintaining these circumstances in view, it will become a miscarriage of justice to believe the statements of these witnesses at this stage and dispose of prosecution cases only on the grounds that their statement was recorded after about a month incident,” ASJ Bhat stated in a command on October 11 .
He added, “In the opinion of this court, the delay in recording witness statements seems unintentional or denied.
It seems to mention the applicable situation.
In the area during and after the incident of riots and therefore, the defendant could not claim the debit in this case only at this score.
“During hearing, Delhi police told the court that the nine defendants created disharmony in the community by threatening and terrorizing the public in general and that their actions were not only anti-national but also challenges against the rules of the law in Delhi.
However, defense advice said that CCTV video footage which was part of the charging sheet in this case was related to February 24, while the incident was recognized on February 25, 2020.
Advice showed that there was no CCTV video.
Records on recording related to February 25, a fact that is not debated by the Senior Public Prosecutor, according to court orders.
However, the prosecutor said that they did not depend on CCTV video recording and that their case was based on other evidence on the record, including the ocular version of the witnesses.
After considering the entire material on the record, the judge said that the prime -facie was proven that the accusations under Section 147 (riots), 148 (riots, armed with deadly weapons), 149 (unlawful assembly), 380 (theft), 380 (Theft), 427 (Mischief), 436 (ARSON), 452 (Trespass House) from the Indian criminal code are responsible for framed against all defendants.