Read Time: 07 minutes

The Delhi High Court recently denied bail to one Ajay @Monu who had allegedly participated in the killing of four Muslim men during the Delhi riots. 

Noting that the sole eyewitness of the case resides in the same locality as Ajay's and there is a possibility that if released, Ajay might influence or threaten him, the bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad opined that the present case was not fit for grant of bail at this juncture.

The fact that examination of the sole public witness still remains and is fixed for January 20, 2022, also became a factor in court's decision. Though Ajay has been denied bail, for now, he has been given liberty to approach the court again with his bail plea after sole public witness's due examination is conducted. 

Denying Ajay his liberty, for the time being, the bench highlighted, "A duty resides in this Court to be conscious of whether granting of bail can lead to a possible impediment in the conducting of investigation that can cause inevitable rupture in public order."

Ajay is accused of indulging in the riots that broke in the city last year with his sword. The sole eyewitness in his statement under section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code had stated that he saw Ajay hitting the deceased with a sword on February 25, 2020. 

The court also took on record that the three charge sheets revealed that during interrogation, Ajay had also confessed that due to the protest and slogans raised by Muslims against CAA and NRC, his religious sentiments had been hurt and he was agitated by the same which led him to join the gathering against the Muslim community that was crowding Brijpuri road on February 25. 

Court also noted that the charge sheets also stated that after both the communities started pelting stones at each other, the Muslim community outnumbered Hindus, therefore, Ajay retrieved a sword that was lying at his house and indulged in the riots.

It was also mentioned in the charge sheets that the alleged incident was captured in the CCTV footage wherein Ajay could be seen in the clothes that were recovered from his house during the investigation of the case, carrying a sword along with the violent mob.

However, Ajay's counsel had opposed all these allegations stating that though Ajay was visible in the CCTV footage, his presence only indicated that he was merely trying to defend the people of his community from the attack of a mob.

He had also argued that the whole prosecution case relied upon the statement of the sole eye witness whose reliability was also worth questioning. He had asserted that the alleged incident took place on February 25 whereas eye witness's statement was recorded on April 9, which raised doubt about his credibility as in the meanwhile the witness was constantly available with the Police. 

He had also averred that by the time of the present hearing no other evidence was brought on record to corroborate sole eyewitness's testimony. 

But observing that 'Bail jurisprudence attempts to bridge the gap between the personal liberty of an accused and ensuring social security remains intact', the court denied bail to Ajay. 

Court added that bail is the intricate balance between securing the personal liberty of an individual and ensuring that this liberty does not lead to an eventual disturbance of public order.

Case Title: Ajay @ Monu v State of NCT of Delhi