Delhi HC Grants Bail to Riots Accused, Says Witnesses Presented 'Seem Planted'
Security forces patrolling a street in New Delhi after the riots in February. (Reuters)
Irshad Ahmed, who is charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, in a case registered at Police Station Dayalpur relating to the Delhi riots, had moved the high court seeking regular bail.
- Last Updated: October 9, 2020, 19:26 IST
- FOLLOW US ON:
The Delhi High Court, while recently granting bail to Delhi riots accused Irshad Ahmed, said to be a close aide of main accused Tahir Hussain, noted that the witnesses in the present case "seem to be planted ones".
"It is not in dispute that there is no electronic evidence such as CCTV footage or photos to implicate the petitioner in the present case. As per the statement of both the eye witnesses, they had identified the petitioner and other co-accused. However, they have not made any complaint on the date of incident, i.e. February 25, 2020, whereas the FIR was lodged on February 28, 2020. Thus, the said witnesses seem to be planted ones," said a single judge bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait.
Releasing Ahmed on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs 25,000 and with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, the court also noted: "The trial court shall not get influenced by the observation made by this court while passing the order."
Ahmed, who is charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, in a case registered at Police Station Dayalpur relating to the Delhi riots, had moved the high court seeking regular bail.
Opposing the bail application, Special Public Prosecutor Manoj Chaudhary, appearing for the Delhi Police, said that on February 25, around 100 people were standing on the terrace of the house of Tahir Hussain and were throwing petrol bombs on the houses of the other community.
"Petitioner's name was disclosed by co-accused Tahir Hussain. Petitioner herein is an associate of the said accused," Chaudhary told the court while adding that the statements of the eye witnesses confirmed the role of Ahmed.
"Mobile phone location of the petitioner has ascertained his presence at the spot. Thus, the present petition deserves to be dismissed," he had said.