Delhi Riots: Delhi Court acquits man accused of being member of ‘unlawful assembly’ of all charges

Read Time: 06 minutes

The Karkardooma Court of Delhi has recently acquitted Noor Mohammad, accused of being a member of an 'unlawful assembly in the Delhi Riots case which vandalized a shop named Bunny Bakers. 

A bench of Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Virender Bhat stated that “no cogent and reliable evidence was on record to hold the accused guilty of the charges framed against him” and thus, Noor is acquitted of all charges.

Noor was accused of being a member of an unlawful assembly taken place on February 25, 2020, between 3.00 p.m. and 4.00 p.m. The unlawful assembly was accused of vandalizing the shop bearing no.E17 M/s Bunny Bakers, Chand Bagh Pulia, Khajuri Khas, Delhi, committing robbery of the articles lying in the shop, and then setting it ablaze.

Noor was charged with offenses under Section 143/147/148/454/392/436 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), on August 31, 2021.

The prosecution had examined 7 witnesses to establish charges against Noor.

Later on March 30, 2022, Noor was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), wherein he had denied all the incriminating facts and circumstances put against him and claimed false implications.

The court noted that “there is no other witness, who had identified, either directly or indirectly Noor as a member of the unlawful assembly which had committed the riotous incident in question.

PW1 the proprietor of the vandalized/burnt shop of M/s Bunny Bakers had nowhere stated in his entire deposition that he had gone to the Police Station on April 2, 2020, and had identified Noor there when he was being interrogated by the IO, court stated.

“Keeping in mind the nature of testimonies of the above witnesses, this court finds it difficult to accept the prosecution version with regards to the identification of the accused as a rioter”, the court stated.

The court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Masalti & Ors. v. State of UP, AIR (1965), wherein it has held that-

“When a criminal Court has to deal with the evidence pertaining to the commission of an offense involving a large number of offenders and a large number of victims, the normal test is that the conviction should be sustained only if it is supported by two or more witnesses who give a consistent account of the incident in question. When an unlawful assembly or a large number of persons take part in arson or in a clash between two groups, in order to convict a person, at least two prosecution witnesses have to support and identify the role and involvement of the persons concerned.”

Hence, the court acquitted Noor Mohammad of all the charges framed against him.

Case Title: State v. Noor Mohammad @ Noora