The court filed charges in a case of Delhi anti-Hindu riots against 2 accused, Shamim Ahmad, Mohammad Kafil (Kapil) and Faizan for arson and vandalisation of a school called Arun Modern Public Senior Secondary School in Brijpuri during the peak of violence on 25th of February 2020. The third accused who was a part of the mob, Faizan, is absconding and has been declared a PO (proclaimed offender). In the order framing charges, the court categorically said that it is apparent from the facts of the case that the three joined the riotous mob with the specific intent to damage property belonging to Hindus.
Passing the order framing charges in the case of Delhi anti-Hindu riots, the court said:
I find that sufficient material is there to show that all the 3 accused persons and other unknown members of the mob comprising of more than 5 persons formed an unlawful assembly with a common object. In pursuance to their common object, they attacked and forcibly entered into Arun Modern Public Senior Secondary School with common object to cause maximum damage. It is also apparent that this school was chosen, because it belonged to Hindu and the common object of aforesaid mob was to cause damage to the properties of Hindu. The mob was equipped with different weapons. Thus, this mob committed riot. They burnt the computer lab and library of this school apart from above mentioned vehicles and other articles of the school.
Facts of the case: Arun Modern Public Secondary School and Delhi anti-Hindu riots
On the 25th of February 2020, a call was received by PS Dayalpur after a mob of 150-200 people had entered the Arun Modern Public Secondary School and started vandalising the school and indulging in arson. When the ASI reached this school, he found that the school had been completely vandalised and charred. He also found that other vehicles were also set on fire.
The court order says that because the police was busy maintaining law and order, further action could not be taken immediately on the DD entry. A DD entry is a daily entry, where every complaint received by the police is recorded. On the following day, Jyoti Rani, the Principal of the school, made a formal written complaint about the attack on the school.
According to the order, “In her complaint, she alleged that on 25.02.2020 at about 4 p.m., around 150-200 persons forcibly entered into the school. They vandalized various articles of the school as well as various vehicles parked inside the school campus. They set the vehicles on fire apart from various other articles viz. Generator, almirahs, numerous documents. Computer systems, items of chemistry lab, furniture etc. This mob also burnt the computer lab completely. They also burnt the school library. The school suffered a loss of Rs.1-1.25 crores due to such incident”.
The order says that after the registration of the case, several other complaints came to the fore. While 2 Hindus complained of their vehicles being burnt, there was one Muslim man as well, Gayyur Ali, who complained of his Honda Amaze being burnt by the mob. These vehicles and centre were inside the campus of aforesaid school or parked around it, which were burnt by the mob. The police officer who was on duty in the area attested to identifying the three accused and his version was corroborated by other witnesses as well.
The first chargesheet was filed in the court on 13.06.2020 and then there were two supplementary chargesheets that were filed in the case.
What was the case of the defence and what the court said
The defence counsel for the three accused made the following three claims:
- The witnesses who identified the accused were planted by the police.
- There was a variation in the complaint filed and the FIR registered by the police.
- That the FIR was registered much later (belatedly).
The prosecution countered the contention of the defence on all these counts. The court agreed with the prosecution that at this stage of the case, the court was not supposed to look at whether witnesses were planted or not. Further, the court held that there was no variation between the complaint filed and the FIR registered by the police. On the question of the delayed filing of the FIR, the court said, “IO has given reason for the same in the chargesheet and credibility of such reason shall be appreciated at the final stage”.
The court therefore ordered, “Thus, on the basis of above-mentioned discussion, I find that accused persons namely Shamim Ahmed and Mohd. Kafil @ Kapil are liable to be tried for offence u/s 147/148/427/435/436 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and Section 188 IPC”.
