[Delhi Riots] Delhi High Court cancels bail granted to Faisal Farooq, says personal liberty of little value if larger interests are at stake

The Delhi High Court today allowed the State Government's appeal against a Lower Court order granting bail to a school owner accused in the Delhi Riots case, Faisal Farooq. (State v. Faisal Farooq).Farooq, the proprietor of Rajdhani School in Northeast Delhi, has been accused of leading riots in the Northeastern parts of Delhi in February this year..The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait observed that there was material that pointed to Farooq being present around the area of the riots. .In holding to the effect, the Court overturned the finding of the lower court that Farooq was not present at the scene of the riots near Rajdhani school. Justice Kait remarked, ."... while deciding an application for bail, the interest of the society is also to be safeguarded. The entire country is aggrieved by the action of such offenders who tarnish the basic secular fabric of the nation and needs to be punished severely. Personal liberty of an individual though precious, is of little value if the larger interest of the people and nation are at stake."Delhi High Court.Finding reason to differ with the lower court's order on several counts, the High Court averred that the Additional Sessions Judge had erred in granting bail..From the material produced, the High Court concluded:The CCTV footage produced showed Faisal behind Rajdhani School. The Additional Sessions Judge had found to the contrary.Faisal allowed his school premises to be used by rioters and was therefore arrested for conspiracy. The lower court had reasoned that since he was not present on the scene of occurrence, evidence of his complicity in crimes under Sections 395, 397, 436, and 455 of the Indian Penal Code was wanting.Roop Singh, a guard at DRP School, witnessed to having observed Faisal leave the school on a motorcycle. This was corroborated by other witnesses as well. The lower court had recorded the contrary, that Roop Singh had not witnessed seeing Faisal or overhearing anything that pointed to his involvement.Roop had also stated that he heard Faisal tell Manoj "allow the Muslims into the school and today we will show the Hindus." ("En saab Ko Andaar Jane Do. Yeh sab Mussalman Bhai. Aaj Hindu ko dekh lenge").Geeta, Roop Singh's wife identified one of the rioters as a relative of Faisal's who drove his vehicle. The lower court had relied on her statement to point out that Faisal was not present at Rajdhani that day.Manoj, a security guard at Rajdhani school, testified that Faisal left the school with instructions that rioters were to be allowed inside the building. The riots began thereafter.In his testimony before the lower court Manoj stated that Faisal spoke to some persons outside the school at 1:30 PM, leaving soon after. The riots began only at 3 PM, he had stated.There were flowcharts to show that his links to Pinjra Tod, PFI, and Muslim Clerics, but investigations were ongoing.Contrary to Faisal's claims that the school had been damaged by miscreants, an inspection showed only superficial damage to the school building. Bricks, an enormous iron catapult, glass bottles with petrol and other evidence was recovered from the school. The Lower Court had accepted that the catapult was installed on the terrace of the school only 16 days after the riots. The investigation was still in progress, especially as to Faisal's involvement. There were still questions about who installed the 'industrial size' catapault on the roof of Rajdhani school..During proceedings, Faisal's counsel Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta had argued:Faisal's Call Detail Records showed that he had phoned the police six times seeking aid, on account of damage caused to his school.The Chargesheet had recorded that Faisal was not present at the scene of the riots.The photographs the prosecution produced did not help their case because they showed Faisal in the vicinity of the school around 2 PM. They themselves had pegged the riots as having commenced after 3 PM,.Roop's statement was falsified, because the CCTV footage showed Manoj standing by himself, with no people grouped outside the school as he claimed..Delhi Police can choose who will represent it: ASG Aman Lekhi argues before Delhi HC in Faisal Farooq bail as Delhi Govt raises objections .Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi, asserted that Faisal was the kingpin and had deliberately allowed rioters to use his school to wreak havoc on surrounding areas, particularly the neighbouring DRP School..The State maintained that Faisal had made available ropes, bottles, etc., and the catapult to be used by rioters. Bullets were fired from the terrace of Rajdhani school killing two people, it was submitted further..The lower court had erroneously construed Roop Singh's, Manoj, and Geeta's evidence, the State attempted to underscore..Further, the finding that the catapult was installed only later could not be countenanced as it was an "industrial-sized" catapult..Delhi Police can choose who will represent it: ASG Aman Lekhi argues before Delhi HC in Faisal Farooq bail as Delhi Govt raises objections .Finding merit in the State's submissions, the High Court has now opined that the lower court had allowed Faisal bail at a premature stage ignoring relevant material. .Justice Kait observed, ."... keeping in view the fact that respondent/accused is wealthy and he has reputation and roots in the society, therefore, since investigation in the present FIR is pending and the prosecution is likely to file supplementary chargesheet, therefore, the respondent/ accused may influence the witnesses and hamper the investigation and trial.".Taking note of the fact that the lower court's order had been kept on hold by a Supreme Court order, the Court recorded that Faisal continued in prison even after the bail initially allowed him..On these terms, the State's appeal was allowed. On a parting note, the High Court cautioned,"I hereby make it clear that the Trial Court shall not get influenced during trial by the observations made by this Court while passing this order.".Read the Judgment: