[Delhi Riots] Terror, trauma caused delay in going to police: Delhi court frames charges against man

While framing rioting and other charges against an accused, a Delhi court noted that an atmosphere of “terror and trauma” prevailing in North East Delhi in the aftermath of the Delhi Riots dissuaded the general public from recording their statements with the police [State v. Javed]..Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt underscored, “Several innocent lives were lost during the violence and several others were rendered homeless. The shops as well as business establishments of several people were reduced to ashes by the rioters. There was an atmosphere of terror and trauma prevailing in the entire NorthEast Delhi for months even after the riots were controlled.”.General public was so traumatised due to violence that nobody was willing to come forward to make statement to police.Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt.Thus, in the given circumstances the Court explained how public persons, who were witnesses to the violence, could not be expected to come forward immediately to give statements to the police. The order stated,“The general public had become so traumatised due to the violent incidents that nobody was willing to come forward to make statement to the police. The police had to play double role i.e. restorers of peace as well as the investigators.”.The Delhi Police were stated to be controlling the riots; restoring peace; instilling a sense of security in the public even as they had to conduct investigation in hundreds of FIRs registered in the aftermath of the riots, the Court further noted.“Locating the witnesses and tracing culprits was an uphill task for the police. In these circumstances, it would be travesty of justice to discard the statements of the witnesses only on account of delay,” the order reasoned..Seeking discharge in a case, counsel representing the accused pointed out that there was about a year’s delay in recording the statements of two public witnesses. He argued that the statement of a policeman who had reportedly identified his client was first recorded a month after the registration of the FIR, which in itself was delayed.The Court, however, said that even the witnesses had mentioned in their statements that on account of riots, the atmosphere in their neighbourhood was very hostile and that members of both the communities feared each other.“It is on account of this fear that they did not muster courage to contact the police and to give their statements. Therefore, their statements cannot be disbelieved at this very stage merely on the ground of delay and without testing their veracity during the trial on the touchstone of cross-examination,” the order stated..Finding sufficient prima facie material on record, charges under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapon) and other relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were framed against the accused Javed. The charge under Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the IPC was, however, dropped.The case pertains to an incident around a school where rioters purportedly resorted to violence using explosive substances..Special Public Prosecutor Madhukar Pandey represented the State..[Read Order]