A Delhi court has delivered a sharp rebuke to the city's police force while acquitting two men accused in a case related to the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots. The court pointed out glaring lapses in the investigation, which failed to produce reliable evidence, and cautioned the police to take corrective measures to protect personal liberties.
Case Details and Acquittal
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh acquitted Deepak and Prince in a case concerning an alleged attack on the Jannati Masjid in Gokalpuri during the communal violence. The third accused, Shiv, died during the trial proceedings. The prosecution had alleged that on February 24, 2020, an armed mob attacked the mosque, set it on fire, and looted property.
Court's Scathing Observations on Evidence
The judge's order highlighted multiple critical failures in the police investigation. A key piece of evidence, a compact disk (CD) submitted by a secret informer, was rejected as unreliable. The court noted that the investigating officers made "no effort to prove or find out the source" of this CD.
Furthermore, while police collected CCTV footage from a nearby State Bank of India branch, the footage was deemed useless. The judge observed that the footage from three cameras did not show any incident at the relevant time and date, nor did it even cover the mosque. "The IO just collected this CCTV, dumped it on record," without proper analysis, the court stated.
Unreliable Witnesses and Procedural Delays
The prosecution's case relied on 16 witnesses, including the imam and naib imam of the mosque, who reported losses of Rs 45,000 and Rs 75,000 in cash plus jewellery worth Rs 1.4 lakh, respectively. However, the defence argued that witnesses were "planted."
The court found the testimony of key witnesses Sajid and Sarim to be unreliable. It highlighted an unexplained delay of over one-and-a-half years in recording their statements and noted inconsistencies. The judge also pointed out that the investigating officer's records did not mention examining these witnesses, further undermining the prosecution's case.
Ultimately, the court expressed that it was "pained" by the manner of the investigation. It acquitted the accused due to a lack of credible evidence, while issuing a caution to the police to ensure that personal liberties are not undermined without sufficient proof.
