A Delhi Court Monday dismissed a revision plea filed by the Delhi police challenging an order of a Metropolitan Magistrate directing the registration of an FIR on a complaint of a victim of North-East violence.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Vinod Yadav said the investigating agency had evidently been found to be on the wrong side of the law.
"This court has found in several cases of riots in the entire length and breadth of police stations in North-East Delhi that there was complete lack of supervision of the investigation(s) by the senior police officers of the district. All is not over yet if the senior officers now look into the matter(s) and take remedial measures required in the matter(s), so that justice could be given to the victims", ASJ Yadav said.
Nishar Ahmad, a victim, had filed a complaint with SHO Gokulpuri on 25 February 2020, regarding a mob from a particular community vandalizing and looting his house.
On March 18, at the Eidgah relief camp in Mudtafabad, Ahmad gave a detailed complaint stating how a mob of 200-250 people was mobilised using a public address system, where "a clarion call was given to persons of a particular community to go and vandalize and put on fire the houses of persons of another community".
However, the police clubbed his complaint with other complaints in which an FIR was lodged. This was challenged by Ahmad through his lawyer MR Shamshad, on the basis of which the Metropolitan Magistrate directed the registration of an FIR. This was challenged by the Delhi police before ASJ Yadav.
Turning down the plea, the revisional court observed that Ahmad's complaint was with regard to the accumulation of people of a particular community, who were about to start a riot.
"No investigation was conducted with regard to the allegations made by the respondent. There is not even mention about the complaint dated 23.05.2020(pertaining to criminal intimidation of Nishar) in the entire chargesheet", the court observed.
The court added it did not find even a semblance of an investigation with regard to the criminal conspiracy hatched by the persons named in the complaint dated 18.03.2020, by either the local police who investigated the matters under consideration or by the Special Cell, which investigated the case of a larger conspiracy. "Even the offence of criminal conspiracy has not been invoked in any of the cases where the respondent is either the complainant or witness".
Ahmad in his petition under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C had given clear allegations against the persons named in the complaint dated 18.03.2020 in a tabular format, but the police did not pay any heed and did not conduct any investigation, the judge noted.
The court also sent a copy of its order to the Delhi Police Commissioner for issuing appropriate direction(s) to re-assess the investigation(s) conducted in a host of riots cases in North-East Delhi and order for remedial action(s) immediately, so that they can have an effective trial before a court of law.