New Delhi: In the first place in the case related to the Northeast Delhi riots in February last year – from cases related to 755 firs – the city court on Tuesday released the only accusation, observing that investigation “the desired deficiency “.
While opening Suresh, the court, however, noted that the testimony of the witnesses had proven that the establishment of the Assembly who violated the law of 15-20 people, riots and searching the complainery shop had indeed occurred.
But Suresh is the only person captured on this problem.
Additional Session of Judge Amitabh Rawat said the testimony of witnesses in this case contradicted and there was a “striking inconsistency”.
“In the light of the testimony of their careful witnesses and supervision, it was very clear that prosecution had failed to prove the case, forgetting a reasonable doubt.
All major witnesses vary with each other to the material provisions, impact on the prosecution version …
There is no wealthy testimony that connects the defendant for the current violation in question, “said the judge in his order.
A 27-year-old worker, Suresh, who was arrested in the case on April 7 last year, was released from all violations that could be punished under Section 143 (penalties for illegal assembly), 147 (Rioting), 427 (Mischief), 454 ( Breaking-House) Read with 149 (unlawful assembly) and 395 (punishment for Dacoity) IPC.
The Northeast Delhi has witnessed Largescale communal violence from 24-26 February last year when the clash broke out between Pro-CAA and anti-CAA protesters, where 53 people lost their lives and several hundreds of injured.
Suresh had a guarantee in the case on February 25 but was still in Mandoli prison because he could not give the number of associations, his advice, Rajeev Pratap Singh Tomar.
This case was registered with a complaint of one ASIF, tenant at the store, which was damaged and looted during the riots.
ASIF has claimed in his complaint that he had closed the store on February 25, 2020, when he heard the commotion outside his house and saw 15-20 people armed with ‘Danda’ and ‘Sariya’.
Asif has accused that the masses incited others to damage and loot shops because they have by a Muslim, and when he tried to intervene, he was threatened with terrible consequences.
The court, in its order, noted that ASIF was not an eyewitness for the incident of riots and other witnesses, Bhagat Singh, the most rejected by prosecution, has denied identifying Suresh on February 25, 2020, or when police officers came to him with someone who was arrested.
“He (Singh) specifically overthrew PW6 & PW7 (police officials) told him that the defendant was involved in the riots …
in fact, as per PW2 (Singh), he told the police and PW6 head Sunil Kumar had reached the place even before.
He reached the shop.
The testimony of PW2 is, by itself, fatal to prosecution cases, “said command.
The court also said the deposition of prosecution witnesses, Sunil Kumar police chief, that he had identified Suresh during the riots “could not be maintained”.
If he has identified the defendant during the riots, then why did he not record entries about it until FIR was submitted on February 28, 2020, the court asked.
“As can be done on the cumulative reading of all testimonies of all witnesses, the identification of the defendant was not determined at all.
The investigation carried out was far from the desired,” he said.
The police have recorded a statement of seven witnesses in this case.