Representative image
Representative image

Delhi violence: Court dismissed bail plea of accused taking witness statements at face value

ANI | Updated: Oct 02, 2020 14:41 IST

New Delhi [India], October 2 (ANI): A special court in Delhi has dismissed the bail petition of an accused facing various charges in connection with a case related to the northeast Delhi violence in February after taking the statements of witnesses at "face value".
Additional Session Judge Vinod Yadav, while dismissing the bail plea of accused Gulfam on Thursday, said that this court has to take the statements of witnesses at their face value at the stage of hearing on bail application at "precognizance/ precommittal stage".
The court opined that there was enough material on record to prima facie presume the presence of the applicant at the scene of the crime, participating in rioting, robbery, arsoning and vandalizing public and private properties of the persons belonging to a particular community.
"Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact that the eye-witnesses are residents of the same locality and if released on bail at this stage, the applicant may make an endeavour to threaten, intimidate or liquidate the witnesses. As such, I am not inclined to admit the applicant on bail. The bail application is accordingly dismissed," the order said.
According to the prosecution, the accused was close to former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain, who is a key conspirator and accused in several northeast Delhi violence cases.
"The principal accused Tahir Hussain, who was holding the post of Municipal Councillor, gathered persons from his community on the basis of religious sentiments, promoted enmity between two communities on the ground of religion and facilitated them to the rooftop of his building," the prosecution submitted.
It said the co-accused persons in the matter were very well-known to him and some of them are his close relatives, due to which "meeting of minds" took place very quickly.

Counsel for the applicant argued that he has been in judicial custody since March 9, 2020, in the matter and claimed that Gulfam has been falsely implicated in the present case.
"There is no legally sustainable evidence against him. He has not been named in the FIR and the allegations levelled in the FIR are general in nature, vague, unspecific, baseless, indefinite, without any material particulars, self-contradictory and not supported by any documentary proof. No recovery of any sort has been effected from him," the counsel submitted.
The counsel further argued that the applicant is not seen in any of the CCTV footages either.
His lawyer also submitted that the Gulfam has no concern with Jamia Coordination Committee and there is nothing on record to suggest that he was in touch with principal accused Tahir Hussain. The counsel said that the applicant is the sole bread earner of his family.
Special public prosecutor Manoj Choudhary submitted the case is "sensitive" in nature, which involves riots, which took place at or around the house of the principal accused Tahir Hussain.
"During the investigation, it has emerged that there was a deeprooted conspiracy which triggered communal riots in Delhi. A web of conspirators, instigators and rioters has been identified and several of them have been arrested," Choudhary submitted.
It was further argued that the riots were not impromptu, but were conspired with the intent to create communal strife and to malign the image of the country under the garb of democratically opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
Chaudhary argued that applicant is also an accused in the case related to the murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) Officer Ankit Sharma murder and another FIR with various charges of looting godowns and riots etc. It was further submitted that bail application of co-accused Shoaib Alam has already been dismissed by this court.
At least 53 people lost their lives and hundreds of others were injured in the violence which took place in February this year in the northeast area of the national capital between groups supporting and opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act. (ANI)