Court raps prosecution over handling of case, asks CP to take remedial action

New Delhi: A court hearing a 2020 Delhi riots case rapped the prosecution for its handling of the probe and filing of chargesheets, saying it has made a “complete mess”, and referred the matter to the Delhi Police commissioner to take remedial action.

Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh made the observations while hearing arguments on framing charges in the case registered by the Dayalpur police station.

In an order dated October 16, the court said, “It appears that the state has made a complete mess in this matter.”

The court noted that the predecessor judge had made a categorical observation about the complete confusion created by the charge sheet in the case regarding the clash of two different mobs during the February 2020 northeast Delhi communal riots.

It said that members of both the mobs, which had different objectives, were named as accused in the same charge sheet for several offences and that there was no clarity as to the role of the mobs, such as which mob had caused damage, rioting or arson at which specific place and to which properties.

The court also noted the previous judge’s order to investigate some complaints, including those of three people - Azad, Zaid and Sarla Devi.

It said that after the order, the prosecution initially requested to withdraw certain complaints from the charge sheet. However, when faced with certain court queries, the special public prosecutor sought to file a third supplementary charge sheet.

The court said that the prosecution, through the fresh additional final report, intended to withdraw seven complaints on the grounds of requiring further probe, besides seeking the discharge of two accused.

It noted the prosecution’s submissions that separate FIRs would be registered for these complaints and thereafter, the two persons, whose discharge had been sought, would be chargesheeted.

Noting the evidence before it, Judge Singh then rapped the prosecution for not adhering to the previous judge’s order.

He said, “Apparently, instead of conducting further investigation as directed, and to show to the court how these two mobs could have been connected in sharing a common object, the prosecution, if I am bold enough to say so, has tried to circumvent that order.

“And at the same time, it has not even done what it has stated in the supplementary chargesheet because today, on being inquired, it is submitted that no FIR with regard to complaints, which had been sought to be withdrawn through supplementary chargesheet number 3, had been registered.”

The judge asked whether it was possible that the supplementary charge sheet, which was filed with a certain undertaking and purpose, was merely to defeat the order of the court?

He said, besides, no investigation had been conducted into the complaints of Azad, Zaid and Sarla Devi.

“Therefore, it is evident that the entire case, which already had blurred facts, has been further mired with confusion by this supplementary charge sheet and the police, in fact, have not bothered to comply with the order dated January 21, 2025 (of the predecessor judge),” the judge said.

He directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Delhi Police Commissioner, who had to “ensure remedial action” and see to it that the previous judge’s order was complied with.

“It is further directed that the Commissioner of Police shall also ensure that a report, duly signed by him or by the special commissioner of the area, is submitted to the court on or before the next date of hearing (on November 14),” the judge said. with agency inputs