A Delhi court has firmly rejected the bail applications of five individuals accused in the Turkman Gate stone pelting case. Judicial Magistrate First Class Sayesha Chaddha delivered the ruling on January 14, highlighting the serious nature of the allegations and the preliminary phase of the investigation.
Court Emphasizes Gravity of the Incident
The court observed that this was not merely a simple assault case. It involved relentless stone pelting, significant damage to government property, and injuries to police officers performing their duties. Magistrate Chaddha described the incident as an attack on the administration itself.
Considering these factors, the court found it appropriate to dismiss the bail pleas at this investigative stage. The accused named in the order are Mohammad Areeb, Mohd. Kaif, Mohd. Kashif, Adnan, and Sameer.
Defense Arguments and Prosecution's Stance
Defense counsel Advocate M Asad Beig, representing Kaif, Kashif, and Areeb, argued that the arrests were premature. The accused were apprehended around 3 AM on January 7, well before the FIR was registered at 10:07 AM the same day.
Kaif's defense claimed he was at his home from 7 PM until his arrest, supported by CCTV footage. Areeb was reportedly at Chitli Kabar, approximately one to two kilometers from the incident site. Adnan's counsel stated he was arrested from his house around 1:30 AM and was not visible in the CCTV footage relied upon by police.
The Delhi Police, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Atul Shrivastava and others, strongly opposed bail. They argued the anti-environment drive near Masjid Faizan E Elahi followed a Delhi High Court order. Police had issued a prohibitory order and requested peace beforehand.
Prosecution evidence included WhatsApp messages and videos. Adnan's mobile phone allegedly contained an inciting message that he forwarded to groups. Kaif and Kashif were identified in CCTV footage. APP Shrivastava stressed this was an attack on the system, not just on personnel.
Case Background and Custody Status
The Tis Hazari Court had earlier remanded eight accused to 14-day judicial custody until January 21. The recent bail rejection for five of them underscores the court's concern over the case's severity.
In rebuttal, Adnan's counsel argued that since he wasn't visible in the CCTV footage, the attempt to murder charge shouldn't apply. The court, however, maintained its position based on the overall evidence and allegations.
This decision marks a significant development in the Turkman Gate case, reflecting the judiciary's cautious approach in matters involving public order and attacks on law enforcement.
