Delhi riots: High Court discharges two men in ‘attempt to murder’ case
NEW DELHI: ‘From a hundred rabbits you can’t make a horse, a hundred suspicion don’t make a proof’, a Delhi court has quoted from the Russian classic ‘Crime and Punishment’ while discharging two accused persons from the offence of attempt to murder in north east Delhi riots case.
The court asked how a case of attempt to murder can be made out against them when the victim himself is absent from the police investigation and has never been seen by police officials. It said there is no statement on record by victim about his gun shot injury or about any mob or rioters.
“That being the case, who is going to say that who shot whom and by whom and where,” said Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat while discharging Imran and Babu from the offences under sections 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act in the case in which one Rahul had allegedly received gunshot injuries during the riots in Welcome area.
The court, however, said there was ground for presuming that both the accused persons have committed the offences of unlawful assembly and rioting and transferred the case back to a magistrate court as the offences were not exclusively triable by the sessions court. Noting the prosecution’s submissions that the accused were part of the rioting mob and thus it was presumed that they allegedly committed the offence of attempt to murder, the court said presumption cannot be stretched to take the shape of proof.
‘The criminal jurisprudence says that there must be some material against the accused persons to frame a charge. Presumption can’t be stretched to take the shape of proof/evidence. The charge’ sheet depicts nothing for charging them under section 307 IPC or Arms Act.
HC asks govt to reply on inadequate compensation for death of kids
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought response of Delhi government on a plea by parents of two children, who lost their lives during the communal violence in north east Delhi last year, challenging an assistance scheme to help the riot victims as it provides inadequate compensation for the death of minors. Parents of the two minors have challenged fixing of a maximum compensation of `five lakh for death of a child in riots while the maximum compensation for death of an adult has been fixed at `10 lakh. Justice Prathiba M Singh issued notice to Delhi government and sub-divisional magistrate of Seelampur on the petition, which has also been filed on behalf of CPI (M) leader Brinda Karat, who has also been instrumental in securing scholarships for some of such victims. The HC asked the authorities to file their replies within four weeks. While petitioners Ram Sugarat is the father of a 15-year-old boy, who died in Gokulpuri area, Rihana Khatoon is mother of a 17-year-old boy who lost his life due to ‘gunshot injury.