NE Delhi violence: Court awards jail sentences to two convicts for injuring police personnel by gunshot

New Delhi [India], October 30 : Delhi's Karkardooma Court on Monday awarded seven years' punishment to one convict and a five-year jail sentence to another in a case of injuring one police personnel by a gunshot during the Delhi riots of 2020.
This case pertains to an FIR lodged at Police Station Dayal Pur.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Pulastya Pramachala awarded seven years' imprisonment to convict Imran alias Model and a five-year jail term to convict Imran under section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The court also directed that convicts shall pay a fine of Rs 25,000 each.
In default of payment of the fine, each convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and six months.
Both these convicts were charge-sheeted by the police for having committed offences punishable under sections 147/148/149/152/186/332/353/307/120B/34 of the IPC.
The court had convicted the accused on August 31, 2023.
This case was registered on the Complaint filed by Delhi Police constable Deepak (now head constable).
Special public prosecutor (SPP) Madhukar Pandey argued on behalf of the Delhi police.
He submitted that both convicts were involved in heinous crimes.
They were acting against the State and had such a criminal bent of mind that they did not hesitate to fire gunshots towards the police team, he said.
As per the prosecution, the case was registered on February 26 in 2020.
In his statement, he alleged that on February 25 in 2020 by the order of a senior officer, he was on duty at Brijpuri Pulia in the Dayalpur police station area.
The court had convicted them for committing offences under section 148 (Rioting with a deadly weapon), 188 (violation of orders passed by a public servant), 307 (attempt to murder), 332 (Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty) IPC read with Section 149 IPC.
"I find that prosecution has proved that both the accused persons were part of the riotous mob, which had assembled in defiance to order under section 144 (Prohibitory orders) Cr.P.C.," ASJ Pramachala said in the judgement passed on August 31.
The Judge further said that It is also well proved that accused Imran alias Model fired a gunshot towards the police team, while accused Imran remained present with him during this firing.
"It is within the knowledge of any normal person that gunshot may cause death of the person, who is hit by such shot. It was a matter of chance that the shot fired by Imran alias Model did not hit constable Deepak at a vital part of his body and that it hit him on his leg only," the judge observed in the judgement.
The court further observed, "But the fact remains that firing a shot is not a normal act to be done in a casual manner. The person firing a gunshot knows that it may kill the person aimed at or any other person present near the aim unless it is fired in the air for a different purpose."
However, the court acquitted the accused persons from the offence under section 186 (Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions) IPC for want of complaint under section 195 (Prosecution for contempt of the lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence).
The court said that though the charge was also framed for an offence under section 186 IPC, but prosecution did not prove the complaint under section 195 Cr.P.C. in respect of this offence.
"Therefore, though facts proved on the record show that police officials were obstructed by this mob including both accused, but for want of such complaint, accused persons cannot be convicted for this offence," the court said.
The court further said, "However, it is well proved that public servants i.e. police officials were obstructed while suppressing the riot, by this mob including both accused persons."
Both accused were instrumental in using criminal force to deter the police officials in the discharge of their duty and they caused simple injury to constable Deepak in this process, the court said in the judgement.
Ct. Deepak alleged that on February 25, he was performing his duty at Brijpuri Pulia, at anti-CAA protest site.
It was further alleged by him that a mob of around 1000-1200 persons had gathered and the persons in the mob were equipped with dandas and iron rods. Persons in the mob started setting fire to properties (shops, schools and houses) situated near Brijpuri Pulia. They also set on fire the vehicles parked on the road.
He further alleged that despite making an appeal to them by SHO with the help of police staff thereby making a request to return to their home, the mob continued becoming more aggressive and raising slogans.
It was further alleged that the mob was also not allowing the fire brigade vehicle.
He alleged that police staff present there had fired tear gas to disperse and pacify the mob and at that moment some unknown person fired gun shot and he received a gunshot injury in his right leg.
Thereafter, Ct. Rohit took the injured to the GTB Hospital for medical treatment.
Defence counsel had argued that there is no CCTV footage of the incident or photograph of injury to constable Deepak.
The court rejected the submissions and said, "However, it is not necessary that every incident would be covered by some CCTV camera, especially when during riot many cameras were also damaged. Similarly, a photograph of injury being taken was not a mandatory procedure."
Hence, the absence of the same cannot wash away the testimony of PW6, the report of the FSL expert and MLC. MLC does mention the same alleged history, as deposed by Deepak and other witnesses. Therefore, there is no reason to discard such evidence, the court said in the judgement.