CCTV evidence from day before crime, serious doubts over credibility of police statements: Court grants bail

new delhi: Noting that the Delhi Police had submitted CCTV footage from a day before the crime allegedly took place and that there were "serious doubts about the credibility" of the witness statements of two constables, a local court here granted bail to Rashid in a case related to the north-east Delhi riots this February.

The court also noted that despite the police having cited eyewitnesses to the alleged crime, the accused was arrested 55 days after the crime was allegedly committed and by that time he was already in Mandoli Jail, in connection with a separate case.

Police claimed that Rashid had purportedly confessed to his involvement in rioting and burning shops while in custody in the earlier case.

Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav granted bail to Rashid on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 20,000 with one surety of like amount in a case related to alleged vandalism and burning of a shop by the rioters during the communal violence in Gokalpuri in February.

The court said the police opposed the bail application on the strength of categorical identification of two public witnesses but a perusal of their statements revealed that they have specifically named co-accused Shahnawaz and were silent about the role of Rashid.

It further noted that the CCTV footage relied upon by the police in the case was of February 24 but the incident was of February 25.

It said there was serious doubt about the credibility of the two police witnesses in the case as they waited till April 7 to name the accused when they had allegedly seen him indulging in riots.

Admittedly, the applicant (Rashid) has neither been named in the FIR nor there are any specific allegations against him. The prosecution, in this case, is opposing the bail application of the applicant on the strength of his categorical identification by public witnesses Atul and Himanshu as also by Beat Officers namely Constable Vipin and HC Hari Babu. A perusal of the statements of public witnesses Atul and Himanshu reveals that they have specifically named co-accused Shahnawaz and are silent about the role of

applicant.

The court said the investigation in the matter was complete, the chargesheet has been filed and the trial was likely to take a long time.

Applicant (Rashid) cannot be made to incarcerate in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter, the court said.