Delhi riots: Delhi Court frames attempt to murder, rioting charges against Ishrat Jahan, Khalid Saifi, 11 others

A Delhi court on Friday framed charges of attempt to murder and rioting against former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan, activist Khalid Saifi and eleven others in a case connected to the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots [State v. Isharat Jahan & Others]..Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, however, discharged the accused from the offences of criminal conspiracy and use of illegal firearms.Referring to the criminal conspiracy charge, the Court concluded that the said charge against the accused was "completely bereft of any reasoning."However, the Court found that prima facie, the accused persons were part of a “riotous armed mob” that had “assembled and refused to follow the direction of police” to disperse and had thrown stones and assaulted police officers. .The accused - Ishrat Jahan, Khalid Saifi, Vikram Pratap, Samir Ansari @ Samim, Mohd. Salim @ Samir Pradhan, Sabu Ansari, Iqbal Ahmed, Anzaar @ Bhoora, Mohd. Ilyas, Mohd. Bilal Saifi @ Lamba, Salim Ahmed @ Salim @ Gunda, Mohd. Yameen @ Yameen Coolerwala and Sharif Khan @ Sharif Khureji have been charged under the following provisions of the Indian Penal Code:Section 147 - rioting Section 148 - Rioting, armed with deadly weapon Section 186 - Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions Section 188 - Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant Section 332 - Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty Section 353 - Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty Section 307 - attempt to murder..All of the accused were discharged for the offences under other provisions of the IPC and the Arms Act. The Court found that only a juvenile was in possession of the firearm alleged to have been used during the protest..However, with regard to the remaining charges, the Court said the Head Constable Yograj, who is the complainant and an eye-witness to the incident, has “categorically identified” that all the accused were part of an unlawful assembly. “Other police witness present at the spot namely Inspector/SHO Sunil Kumar vide his statement has also named accused persons as part of the unlawful assembly (described above by HC Yograj). He has not only named the accused persons but ascribed the offences and the actions of accused persons,” the Court said..One juvenile who was part of the unlawful assembly is alleged to have fired at the police official. However, the Court also noted that there is lack of clarity about the exact time of firing.“Though there is a little discrepancy about the time which could have been clarified by the IO but was not done, yet the time frame is clear and witnesses can clarify the same during trial.”.With respect to the charge of criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B of IPC, the Court called it a “figment of imagination” of the Investigating Officer and said that the idea may have been borrowed from some other case. “Though accused persons have been charge-sheeted for the said conspiracy for which the Investigating Officer has dedicated few paragraphs, yet they do not have any relation with any material which the Investigating Officer has either found or relied upon,” it said..Pertinently, the accused would be facing trial at the Karkardooma Court. Judge Amitabh Rawat had reserved the order on the aspect of framing the charges before his transfer to Rouse Avenue District Courts..[Read Order]