Delhi Court Acquits Nine Men in 2020 Northeast Delhi Riots Case
A Delhi court has acquitted nine men accused in a case related to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish its case due to vague, contradictory, and unreliable witness testimonies. Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh highlighted the weakness of the prosecution's case, noting it relied entirely on three key witnesses whose statements did not inspire confidence.
Weaknesses in Prosecution's Evidence
The court observed that the testimonies were general in nature and lacked specificity, particularly as witnesses provided false information regarding the location of the incidents. This led to the acquittal of Shah Alam, Rashid Saifi, Mohammad Shadab, Habib, Irfan, Suhail, Salim alias Ashu, Irshad, and Azhar alias Sonu.
The case involved alleged rioting and arson in the Chand Bagh area, including:
- Vandalisation of a car and injuries to its occupants
- Burning of a bike belonging to retired SI Mumtaz Ali
- Looting of carts
- Theft of an e-rickshaw owned by Mohd Ishraq
- Arson of a motor shop owned by Salim Ahmed
Critical Date Discrepancy
A significant inconsistency flagged by the court related to the date of the incidents. While the investigating officer recorded it as February 24, 2020, evidence indicated the events occurred on February 25. Referring to Salim Ahmed's deposition, the court noted that he stated he remained at his shop until 7 PM on February 24, with no damage occurring. His shop was intact until noon on February 25, clearly indicating no arson took place on February 24.
The court acknowledged Ahmed's efforts to correct this error with the police, including lodging a complaint at the DCP's office regarding the incorrect date in his statement. However, his concerns were dismissed, with police officials telling him that riots occurred on both dates, so it did not matter.
Credibility of Witnesses
Rejecting doubts over Ahmed's credibility, the judge emphasized that he suffered a loss as his property was burnt down in the riots and had no reason to deliberately change the date. This discrepancy was deemed to go to the root of the prosecution's case, as key witnesses could not have witnessed the incident on February 24 or seen the accused participating in the alleged acts.
The court also found inconsistencies regarding the timing and location of other incidents, including an alleged attack on a news channel vehicle. It concluded that relying on these testimonies would be unsafe, leading to the acquittal of all nine accused.
