On Thursday, 4th February, the Karkardooma Court in Delhi refused to grant bail to Shahrukh Pathan @Khan, who pointed a gun at a cop during February 2020 Delhi riots, whose video had gone viral on the Internet.
By: Khushi Yadav, FIMT College, GGSIP University.
The Additional Sessions Judge, Amitabh Rawat, while denying bail to the accused observed that “The accused is alleged to have participated in the riots and has been duly identified. His picture speaks volume about the involvement and the conduct of the accused on the said day.” The Court further added, “What is material is the gravity of offence and the allegations against the accused which is quite grave. And added to it the conduct of the accused showing that he does not satisfy the triple test for grant of bail.”
The present case has been registered under sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 216/ 186/ 307/ 353/ 34 of Indian Penal Code read with section 25/27 Arms Act.
On 24 February 2020, near Jafrabad Metro station, the accused Shahrukh Pathan was caught brandishing a pistol with the audacity of firing and pointing it at police personnel HC Deepak Dahiya, who was deputed on that day for Law and Order Arrangements. The said person fired on public and also on him intending to kill him by keeping illegal arms. The person identified was accused Shahrukh Pathan @Khan. The whole incident was captured by a journalist on his mobile phone, which became breaking news on all the newspapers and news channels.
The court observed that the conduct of the accused was equally important. He absconded after the incident of 24 February 2020, and after a concerted effort, the applicant was arrested by the team of crime branch based on secret information from Shamli Bus Stand, Uttar Pradesh. The car used for escaping from Delhi after committing the crime was recovered from after Pradesh at his instant instance.
The court observed, “Going by the conduct of the accused and the manner in which he absconded and was arrested later on suggest that he is a flight risk”. “Even applicant’s father Sabir Ali @ Baldev Singh was convicted earlier in a NDPS case.”
Also, the illegal weapon along with two live cartridges and the shirt worn by him at the time of the incident was recovered at his instant from his home on 5 March 2020, during police custody remand. The presence of the applicant is also established through his CDR location.
Khalid Akhtar, counsel for the accused had submitted that the accused was arrested on 3 March 2020 subsequently. He was produced before the court and the police remand was allowed to interrogate the accused. The applicant has been languishing behind bars for the past 10 months despite the non-commencement of trial. He also stated that “thestatement of complainant HC Deepak Dahiya, in this case is, contradictory in terms of various news clippings and statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.”
The counsel, while referring to a judgment of the honorable Supreme Court of India passed in Sanjay Chandra v CBI and many other judgments to seek bail, argued that due to the covid-19 situation, the trial has been suspended and in the pre-trial stage, the accused is incarcerated.
In the view of the above discussion, the judge was not inclined to grant the relief prayed for accordingly the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. of accused Shahrukh Pathan @Khan stood dismissed.