“Exercising freedom of expression with a sword in his hand is not acceptable”: Court denies bail to Delhi riots’ accused

Delhi Court has denied bail in two separate orders to two persons accused of being a part of a riotous mob that killed a Delhi Police Head Constable Ratan Lal.

Lal was murdered while on duty on February 24 during a communal riot in North-East Delhi.

While one accused Mohammad Ibrahim was caught on CCTV camera flashing sword, the other one Badrul Hasan was seen holding a stick (lathi).

“I fail to understand as to what kind of right of freedom of speech and expression was being exercised by the applicant with a “sword” in his hand,” Vinod Yadav, Additional Session Judge, Karkardooma Court said. The court made a similar observation about Hasan.

“It is a matter of record that the mob had become unruly and had given merciless beatings not only to the police officials but also to senior officers who had reached at the spot to pacify them,” the court said.

Advocate Shahid Ali, who appeared for both the accused persons, argued that they have been falsely implicated just because they belong to a particular community.

Ali alleged before the court that the place where Mohammad Ibrahim was seen in a CCTV carrying a sword in his hand is one km away from the scene of the crime. Besides, he said, at the relevant time of the crime, he was in Ziauddinpur Village which 3 km away from the scene of the crime.

“There are more than 1000 persons which are seen in several video footages and the police have not made every person seen in the video-footage an accused in the matter,” Ali argued as recorded in the court order.

Ali also questioned the injury marks on the body of deceased head constable in his post-mortem report and said that “none of the injuries were caused by the “sword”.”

He made a similar argument in favour of the other accused and prayed that since the investigation in the matter is complete; charge-sheets have already been filed; both the accused persons are not required for custodial interrogation; and no useful purpose would be served by keeping them behind bars in the matter, as the trial of the case is likely to take a long time.

However, Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad opposed the application for bail of Ibrahim and played before the judge video footages of CCTV camera installed just 300 meters away from the scene of the crime.

“This Court has noticed the demeanor of the applicant who is moving very aggressively with a “sword” in his hand. He is also seen exhorting the other persons purportedly to move towards scene of crime (SOC),” the court said in its order. It made similar remarks about the other accused in the second order after observing the other CCTV footages.

After hearing both the parties in two cases, the court said that all this prima facie indicates that everything was being done under a well-hatched conspiracy and the common object was to cause blockade of the main Wazirabad Road and “if resisted by the police, then to go to any extent to liquidate them by use of force.“

“Whether he can be convicted in the matter with the aid of Section 149 IPC is a preposterous conclusion at this stage, as the evidence is yet to be led in the matter. However, from the aforesaid behavior of “riotous mob”, the “common object” can be inferred at this stage,” the court added while denying bail.