The court noted that the complainant did not name him as one of the rioters and that as per IO’s testimony, it was a beat constable who had told him about Noora’s involvement in the riot
New Delhi: A Delhi Court has acquitted Noor Mohammad alias Noora in the 2020 Delhi Riots case. The court observed that his identification was āprobably the outcome of an afterthought developmentā of the probe agency.
The investigating officer ASI Jeevanand stated that no one other than the complainant could identify the accused in this case before April 2, 2022. He also testified that he could identify the vandal based on queries he had with a police officer. This was recorded by Judge Pulastya Pramachala.
The Judge said, āThus, I find that IO contradicted his own statement regarding getting information prior to 02.04.2020 of the relevant witness i.e. PW (constable) who could identify the culpritsā¦This shows that identification of accused on 02.04.2020, was probably an outcome of an afterthought development.ā
The Judge expressed surprise over the IO’s failure to record the information either in the case diary or in form of a statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint made by the complainant, Mohammed Hanif, on February 29, 2020. He alleged thatĀ his tailoring shop was set ablaze.
During the investigation of this case, Noora was identified as one of the members of the mob. A chargesheet was filed against him. 8 Witnesses were examined in this case.
Also Read: āWonāt Be Able To Say Noā: Ashok Gehlot Clarifies Stand On Contesting Congress Chief Election
Nora’s attorney argued that his identification was made for the first time on April 2, 2020, and that there was no statement naming him as an accused before that day. Additionally, it was argued that despite the IO’s investigation beginning on March 11, 2020, Noora was only implicated in nine cases by faking witness statements after his detention on April 2, 2020. Additionally, he claimed that the IO had not recorded the complainant’s statement prior to Noora’s detention.
The court noted that the complainant did not name him as one of the rioters. It was also noted that as per IO’s testimony, it was a beat constable who had told him about Noora’s involvement in the riot.
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.
