A Delhi Court recently comprising of a bench of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra Kumar Pandey has acquitted BJP MLA Om Prakash Sharma and Delhi MLA Tarvinder Singh Marwah in the 2016 Patiala House assault case alleging that they caused simple hurt and wrongfully restrained complainant and CPI member Ameeque Jamai. Specific allegation against Sharma was that he criminally intimidated Jamai while threatening to kill him. (State Vs. Om Prakash Sharma & Ors)
The bench acquitted the two over lack of proof and evidences in the matter.
Facts of the case
It was the complainant's case that in February 2016, while he was present in the Court premises as JNU Students including Kanhiya Kumar were to be produced, a group of lawyers wearing black and white clothes started allegedly manhandling a Professor and other journalists which lead to their beating. The accused Om Prakash Sharma and the accused Tarvinder Singh Marwah along with their unknown associates caused simple hurt to the complainant Ameeque Jamai and while causing the simple hurt they wrongfully restrained the complainant. It is the further case of the prosecution that the accused Om Prakash Sharma criminally intimidated the complainant while threatening to kill him.
It was also alleged that they were chanting slogans such as Bharat Mata Ki Jai and Bhartiya Janta Party Jindabad.
The complainant further deposed that Om Prakash Sharma alongwith Marwah, accompanied by a mob, attacked him when he was giving news bytes to media. On trying to escape from the spot, the mob followed him and pushed him down the road.
He further stated that the mob started giving fist blows and kicks on his head, back, face and chest and that Sharma threatened the witness for standing with the justice for Rohit Vamula campaign.
Contention of the Parties
Read also : Court adjourns order on Sharjeel Imam's bail plea till 20 November
According to the Complainant, Ameeque Jamai on the date of the incident was holding the post of General Secretary Minority Cell of Communist Party of India and presently is associated with the Samajwadi Party.
Court Observations and Judgment
The bench noted that there were contrarictory and vague statements made by the complainant.
The Court opined that although Sharma was known to the complainant since the year 2013-2014, however, he made contradictory, vague statement and made improvements in all three statements recorded during the investigation and trial.
The Court said, "No other eye witness of the incident was associated in the investigation or produced in the trial and no valid explanation was offered by the prosecution or by the investigating agency.”
The Court thus remarked, "The Court is of the considered view that it is not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma was present alongwith the mob which allegedly beaten up the complainant Ameeque Jamai. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma had caused any injury of any nature to the complainant Ameeque Jamai. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma threatened to kill the complainant. It is also not proved that accused Om Prakash Sharma was the part of the mob which allegedly wrongfully restrained the complainant."
Read Judgment ;
source ; //www.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