A district court in Ghaziabad has acquitted a man accused of celebratory firing during an Independence Day event in 2021, criticizing the police for a “designed defective investigation.” Chief judicial magistrate Aishwarya Pratap Singh stated that the prosecution relied entirely on a social media clip that police never properly secured, examined, or produced in court.
Case Details
The case against Ritesh Tiwary collapsed because police failed at every crucial stage. “Neither the informant, sub-inspector Tanveer Alam, nor the investigating officer, SI Manoj Kumar, collected the original video or footage. They even failed to collect the CCTV footage available at the spot, nor was any video file ever brought on record during the entire trial,” the judge noted, calling it “nothing short of a shoddy investigation.” The judge ordered that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Ghaziabad police commissioner for “requisite action against the erring police officials.”
FIR and Investigation
The case stemmed from an FIR lodged at Kavinagar police station on August 18, 2021, under Section 336 of the Indian Penal Code (acts endangering human life or personal safety) and Sections 25(9) and 30 of the Arms Act (rash or negligent use of a firearm and celebratory gunfire). According to the FIR, a video circulating on social media showed a man firing two shots during flag hoisting on Independence Day. Police identified the man as Tiwary, a resident of Chhapraula who worked as a security guard at an ENT hospital in Rajnagar.
Police filed a chargesheet on May 12, 2023, and charges were framed on July 10, 2024. Tiwary denied the allegations and faced trial. The prosecution examined only two witnesses, both police personnel.
Witness Testimonies
Prosecution witness 1, complainant Alam, told the court he had learned of the video on August 16 from then circle officer Anshu Jain, who had forwarded the clip to him. However, Alam admitted he had not mentioned this in the FIR or in his statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. During cross-examination, Alam also admitted he never tried to trace the original source of the video and did not speak to any person present at the spot. “I inspected the spot on Aug 18 but did not note down the names of the witnesses or the employees who were witness to the incident,” he told the court.
Investigating officer Kumar, as prosecution witness 2, admitted that CCTV cameras were installed at the ENT hospital and at a nearby Punjab National Bank branch. Yet, he neither referred to those cameras in the probe nor collected or examined the footage. He also said he had asked the complainant for the footage, but it was never given to him.
Court’s Observations
Summing up the lapses, the court said: “The video which is the basis of the entire prosecution case was never obtained by police, the source of the alleged video was never examined, no such video was produced by the prosecution throughout the trial, no independent witness present on the spot was examined, (and) the CCTV footage of the hospital and the adjoining bank was not collected.” Calling the video the “fulcrum of the controversy,” the court held that the prosecution had “utterly failed to prove even the basic facts” against Tiwary and acquitted him of all charges.
The judge also cited a recent Allahabad High Court ruling that asked judicial officers in Uttar Pradesh to flag dereliction of duty and intentionally defective probes to senior authorities. Relying on this direction, the court ordered its judgment to be sent to the Ghaziabad police chief.
