New Delhi: A Delhi court on Monday denied bail to an accused in the February 2020 communal riots, observing that he is accused of having “brutally murdered” an innocent person “just because of the fact [that the victim] belonged to [the] other community”.
Additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav of the Kakardooma court was hearing the bail application of Ashish Kumar, who is accused of being part of a “riotous mob” which attacked and killed two Muslim men. The judge observed that the accused could threaten or intimidate witnesses if released, according to LiveLaw.
The prosecution said that Kumar was part of a mob of 30-40 persons which apprehended three people, Sanobar, Sunil Kumar and Suleman, at about 8:30-8:40 am on February 26, 2020. The mob, armed with dandas (sticks) and rods, asked the trio to show their ID cards. Sunil Kumar was then asked to leave the spot and the mob started assaulting Sanober and Suleman.
Sanober fell unconscious after being hit with an iron rod. He managed to escape after regaining consciousness, but Suleman was assaulted “mercilessly with dandas, rods, kicks and fists on his face, head, chest, abdomen and other parts of the body”, the prosecution said.
He also lost consciousness and the mob threw him into a sewer. He was rescued and taken to GTB hospital, where he died while undergoing treatment.
He was among at least 53 people who were killed in the riots, between February 23 and 26, 2020. Around 200 people suffered injuries.
A woman looks at the drain in Brahmpuri, where some bodies were recovered from. Photo: PTI
Kumar’s lawyer argued that the police did not provide evidence. The lawyer added that his client cannot be “presumed to be having unlawful object” of committing murder and attempt to murder “merely by the aid of Section 149 IPC”. This section allows the prosecution of every member of an unlawful assembly for an offence.
However, relying on the evidence provided by the prosecution, the judge observed that “it is prima facie apparent that the ‘riotous mob’ armed with ‘weapons’ had abducted the deceased Suleman to commit his murder merely on account of the fact that he was from a different community”.
The order adds:
“Therefore, at this stage it cannot be said with certainty that the applicant did not have a common object with the other persons of unlawful assembly. The ‘common object’ of this kind of riotous mob can be easily inferred from their demeanor, depicted in the CCTV footage.”
The court also said it was conscious of the fact that at this stage, the trial is not being dealt with. “We are at precognizance stage and this Court has limitations in making indepth analysis of the statements of witnesses, which are yet to be tested on the anvil of trial,” the judge said.
However, from the behaviour of the “riotous mob”, the “common object” can be inferred at this stage, he opined.
The judge also said that the number and nature of injuries received by Suleman speaks volumes about the “intensity of [the] dastardly act” committed by the mob.
“The offence in this matter is very grave, wherein one innocent person was brutally murdered, just because of the fact the belonged to other community. A perusal of the postmortem report of the deceased Suleman, dated 28.02.2020 reveals that he had received as many as 11 injuries, out of which as many as 7 injuries were so grave in nature that they itself were independently and collectively sufficient to cause death of any person in ordinary course of nature, which speaks volume about the intensity of dastardly act committed by the riotous mob during the course of communal riots.”
Judge Yadav dismissed the application, noting that the court had already dismissed the application of a coaccused whose role “prima facie appears to be on same/identical footing”.
Also Read: Months After the Delhi Riots, Many Victims Still Have Memories of Collective Horror
Court grants interim protection
In another case, judge Yadav on Wednesday granted interim protection from arrest to two persons in seven cases related to the Delhi riots. He stayed the arrests of Mohd Niyaz and Mohd Nafees until February 25 and February 27 respectively in seven cases related to the riots in the Khajuri Khas area.
The court directed both the persons to join the investigation on February 12 at the police station and to continue to do so on the written direction of the concerned investigation officer or SHO.
The anticipatory bail pleas of Niyaz and Nafees, filed through advocate Mehmood Pracha, alleged they were repeatedly threatened by the police and was apprehending arrest.
The pleas said both of them were willing to cooperate in the investigation.
Centre lauds Delhi police’s role
While the Delhi Police have faced accusations of bias and complicity in the riots, the Centre praised the force in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday.
Union minister of state for home G. Kishan Reddy, responding to a written question, said that the Delhi Police had acted “swiftly and in an impartial and fair manner” while dealing with the riots. He said that the police took “proportionate and appropriate actions” to control the situation.
“Sincere, dedicated and incessant efforts made by Delhi Police brought the riotous situation to normalcy within a short span of time and also prevented the riots from spreading across to other areas of Delhi and NCR,” he added.