A Delhi Court has ordered the police to file an FIR and conduct a “fair, independent and impartial” investigation into a riots case which the police had previously closed, despite the fact that video recording against the accused had been submitted as evidence, according to The Indian Express.
The order, passed by Metropolitan Magistrate Fahad Uddin and dated 23 November, pertains to a case where a resident of Yamuna Vihar was allegedly shot on 24 February, amid riots in the national capital.
According to The Indian Express, Saleem, of Yamuna Vihar was allegedly shot when his neighbours Subhash Tyagi and Ashok Tyagi opened fire and attacked his house. Saleem further alleges that his neighbour Nasheer was also shot.
WHAT DID THE POLICE SAY?
The police, according to The Indian Express, alleged that Saleem was involved in the riots and said that he was arrested on 19 March. The police further claimed that Saleem had filed a “false complaint to save himself.”
Explaining it’s decision to close the inquiry, the police, according to The Indian Express, said:
“… no cognizable offence was found to be made out and hence no FIR has been registered in (Saleem’s complaint) case.”
Saleem is reportedly presently out on bail.
WHAT DID THE COURT SAY?
According to the report, the court rejected the police’s claims and said that following a “perusal of the material placed on record – especially the 'video footage of the alleged incident' – it was of the view that a cognizable offence is made out” and that “the offences alleged… require to be investigated by the police.”
Citing the Indian Evidence Act, the court also said:
“This Court deems fit to direct the SHO PS Jafrabad to register an FIR at the earliest under the appropriate Sections of law on the basis of the allegations made in the Complaint…and to ensure that a fair, independent and impartial investigation is made…and a final report filed…without delay.”
The court also said that the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East, should monitor the probe.
The court also called for an FIR in Saleem’s case, and according to The Indian Express, said:
“…The allegations are serious in nature and pertain to the protection of the right to life and property of the complainant. The equal protection of laws cannot be denied to the complainant merely on account of registration of certain FIRs against him…and on the assumption of the IO (Investigating Officer) that the complaint is false and made to save the complainant and that too without even registering an FIR and conducting an independent and impartial investigation into the allegations made by the complainant.”
Further, according to the report, the court put on record Delhi Police’s alleged response to the complaint.
“The complainant asked for help but no police personnel arrived at the spot. The complainant also made a written complaint on March 1 (2020), with the SHO PS Jafrabad and further to DCP concerned on March 17 but no action has been taken…so far by the police.”
SOME ACCUSED NAMED BEFORE
The other accused Naresh Tyagi, Uttam Tyagi, and Supreme Maheswari, in Saleem’s case, have also been named accused by the Delhi police in the murder of 48-year-old Parvez.
In an earlier report, The Indian Express had also pointed out discrepancies in the police chargesheet in Parvez’s murder case.
(With inputs from The Indian Express)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)