Delhi Court Acquits Two Accused in Northeast Delhi Riots Case Over Police Record Inconsistencies
A Delhi court has acquitted two individuals accused in a Northeast Delhi riots case, highlighting significant discrepancies between police records and witness testimonies. The court observed that the presence of two police officials at the scene was doubtful, as their movements did not align with their daily diary entries.
Judge Flags Gaps in Prosecution's Case
Judge Parveen Kumar noted substantial gaps in the prosecution's version of events, stating it would be "highly unsafe to rely on the testimonies of witnesses." He granted the benefit of doubt to the accused, Prem Prakash and Manish of New Usmanpur, leading to their acquittal.
The First Information Report (FIR), registered on March 1, 2020, originated from a complaint by Mohd Athar. He alleged that multiple shops were vandalized on February 25, 2020, during the riots. CCTV footage and witness accounts had identified the duo as part of a mob that allegedly looted and vandalized approximately 8 to 10 shops in Usmanpur, including the complainant's shop.
Defense Challenges Evidence and Police Witnesses
The defense counsel argued that the accused were falsely implicated in the case. They pointed out that the prosecution's case heavily relied on two police witnesses whose own daily diary entries suggested they could not have been present at the scene of the incident.
The defense emphasized that constable Vikas was recorded as having left for Brahampuri on that day. They stressed there was "no explanation how and when" the two police officials met at the site, raising serious doubts about their testimonies.
Court Questions Police Presence and Video Evidence
The court found merit in the defense's submissions and raised several critical questions. It questioned why "no additional force was sent" to the location, despite claims that a mob of 30 to 40 rioters was present at the spot.
Furthermore, the judge observed that constable Vikas, despite his assertions of being at the scene, "wasn't visible in any of the video footage… shown to him during the trial… between 9:30 am to 4:30 pm." This absence in visual evidence significantly undermined the prosecution's claims.
Lack of Clarity on Police Movements
The court emphasized the lack of clarity regarding how the two constables came together during the incident and at what specific time. This issue assumed great significance because official records showed they were not assigned joint duty on that day.
Rather, constable Vikas "was specifically assigned to Shiv Mandir, Brahampuri" according to the daily diary entries. The inconsistency between their assigned duties and their alleged presence at the riot scene created a major loophole in the prosecution's narrative.
Comparison with Another Riots Case
Judge Kumar also compared constable Vikas's testimony in another riots case from New Usmanpur, which was disposed of by the same court in January. In that case, Vikas claimed he took an injured constable to the hospital and returned to Azizia Masjid around 4 to 5 pm.
The court reasoned that if he was present at Azizia Masjid at that time, "he could not have been" at Mansingh Road simultaneously. This contradiction raised further doubts over the prosecution's case and contributed to the court's decision to acquit the accused.
The acquittal underscores the importance of consistent and reliable evidence in legal proceedings, particularly in sensitive cases such as the Northeast Delhi riots. The court's detailed scrutiny of police records and witness accounts highlights the judicial commitment to ensuring justice based on factual accuracy.
