On 27th September, a bench of Delhi High Court consisting of Justice Subromoniam Prasad, held that in order to contend the application of criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B and for an indictable offence to be accomplished, there is no requirement for an overt act to be done in furtherance of the conspiracy. It is the common design which gains utmost importance, and the conspiracy is held to be continued and renewed with regard to all its members wherever and whenever any member of the conspiracy acts in furtherance of this common design.
The court also stated that for a criminal conspiracy to be established, there must be in existence two or more persons who agree to do, or cause to be done, an illegal act or an act which is not illegal by illegal means.
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner seeks bail in FIR No.60/2020 dated 25.02.2020 registered at PS Dayalpur for offences under Sections 186/353/332/323/147/148/149/336/427/302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
The brief facts leading to the instant Bail Application are that a protest against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (hereinafter, “CAA”) had been taking place for 1.5 months prior to the incident at Khajuri Square to Loni Circle at Wazirabad Road, Chand Bagh near 25 Futa Service Road by the Muslim community. When they assembled near Main Wazirabad Road, it is stated that the Complainant and other police officers present attempted to convince the protestors to not move towards the Main Wazirabad Road, however, it is stated that the protestors were carrying sticks, baseball sticks, iron rods and stones.
Contention of the petitioner:
The following contention has been submitted by the Mr. Shahid Ali, learned Counsel for the Petitioner:
- The Petitioner herein was arrested on 30.03.2020,and he has been falsely and illegally implicated in FIR No. 60/2020. He has stated that this is the first bail application which has been preferred before this Hon’ble Court.
- Mr. Ali has argued that as per the Injury Report, which is a part and parcel of the chargesheet, the death of the deceased was due to a gunshot injury and the same was possibly fired by the gun of a police official.
- He has further submitted that the police, instead of being fair and unbiased, has conducted the investigations with mala fide intentions and illegally roped in those who had never even participated in the riots, but were only protecting their neighbourhoods.
- Mr. Ali has argued that the Petitioner herein has never participated in the protest or in the riots at any point of time. On the basis of this, he had submitted that the involvement of the Petitioner in the gruesome murder of HC Ratan Lal is ruled out.
- Mr. Ali had submitted that no evidence has been placed on record to state that the Petitioner was in contact with any of the organisers during the protest.
Contention of the respondent:
The following contention has been submitted by Mr. Amit Prasad, learned SPP for the State:
- It was submitted that three videos that had been found during the course of investigation which depict the scene of crime - Vishal Chaudhry Video (1.48 minutes) shot from Gym Body Fit Garage, Skyride Video (1.37 minutes) and Yamuna Vihar Video (40 seconds), and has submitted that the three videos shed a light on how the assault on the police personnel was pre-meditated.
- Mr Prasad has submitted to this Court that the Petitioner herein, who was wearing a skull cap, black Nehru jacket, and salwar-kurta, was identified on GNCTD Camera ID No.7033301installed at F-443 Chand Bagh at 12:02:26 PM with a sword in his hand.
- It has been submitted to this Court by the learned SPP that the clothes which were worn by the Petitioner on the day of the alleged incident and are visible in the CCTV footage, have been recovered.
- It has been submitted to the Court by the learned SPP that the clothes which were worn by the Petitioner on the day of the alleged incident and are visible in the CCTV footage, have been recovered.
- It was submitted by the learned ASG that in absence of an accused from a video does not translate into absence of the accused from the scene of crime.
Observation and judgement of the court:
The following observation has been made by the hon'ble court:
- A perusal of the material on record has revealed to the Court that the Petitioner has been clearly identified on multiple CCTV footages, carrying a sword and instigating the crowd.
- The argument of the Counsel for the Petitioner that the sword being carried by the Petitioner was merely for self-defence of the Petitioner in a bid to protect himself and his family does not hold any water as the video footage places the Petitioner 1.6 kilometres away from his residence and does not reveal any immediate impending harm to the Petitioner.
- the Petitioner does not satisfy the ingredients to claim bail on ground of parity with the co-accused of the Petitioner who have been enlarged on bail.
- The systematic disconnection and destruction of the CCTV cameras also confirms the existence of a pre-planned and pre-meditated conspiracy to disturb law and order in the city.
- The Court was of the opinion that even though the Petitioner cannot be seen at the Scene of Crime, he clearly was a part of the mob for the sole reason that the Petitioner had consciously travelled 1.6 kms away from his neighbourhood with a sword.
In the light of the above the court held that the Petitioner is not to be granted bail.
Read Judgment;
source ;.latestlaws.com/
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments