The Uttar Pradesh government has moved court seeking to withdraw the high-profile Dadri lynching case against all 19 accused, citing inconsistent statements by the victim's family members and absence of previous enmity between the parties involved.
Key Reasons for Case Withdrawal
In an application filed before the court, the prosecution highlighted several crucial factors that formed the basis for seeking case withdrawal. The application specifically pointed to changing statements by Mohammad Akhlaq's family members regarding the identification of accused persons. Additionally, the prosecution noted that no firearms or sharp weapons were recovered from the accused during the investigation.
The application filed by Brajesh Kumar Mishra, Joint Director Prosecution, Gautam Buddh Nagar, emphasized that both the complainants and accused are residents of the same Bisada village, yet the witnesses provided varying accounts when naming the accused in their official statements.
Sequence of Events and Legal Proceedings
The tragic incident dates back to September 28, 2015, when a mob gathered outside Mohammad Akhlaq's house in Bisada village following an announcement from a local temple alleging that he had slaughtered a cow. The situation escalated rapidly as Akhlaq and his son Danish were dragged out of their home and brutally assaulted until they fell unconscious.
Tragically, Mohammad Akhlaq succumbed to his injuries at a hospital, while his son Danish survived but suffered severe injuries that required surgical intervention. The police had registered a First Information Report at Jarcha police station under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including murder (302), attempt to murder (307), and rioting with deadly weapons.
Inconsistencies in Witness Statements
The prosecution's application detailed significant discrepancies in the statements provided by Akhlaq's family members. According to the document, eyewitnesses did not name any specific accused in their initial statements recorded under Section 161 of CrPC before the police.
However, the scenario changed when statements were recorded under Section 164 CrPC before a magistrate. On November 26, 2015, Akhlaq's wife Ikraman named 10 individuals as accused, while her daughter Shaista identified six additional persons. Subsequently, on December 5, 2015, Akhlaq's son Danish named three more individuals in his statement before the magistrate.
The application stressed the legal significance of these statements, noting that while Section 161 statements aid police investigation, Section 164 statements recorded under oath before a magistrate are crucial for trial proceedings and subject to cross-examination.
Evidentiary Concerns and Constitutional Rights
The prosecution also raised concerns about the evidence collected during the investigation. Police recovered five sticks, rods, and bricks from the accused, but notably, no firearms or sharp weapons were found. This factor contributed to the government's assessment of the case's strength.
Significantly, the application invoked constitutional rights to equality for all citizens, whether they are complainants, victims, or accused persons. The government's move comes under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows a Public Prosecutor to withdraw from prosecution with the court's consent.
The application further noted that all 19 accused had been granted bail by the court during the trial proceedings, and the case diary contained no records suggesting previous enmity, opposition, or hostility between the complainant and the accused parties.
