New Delhi: A Delhi court on Saturday, January 24, granted bail to a Turkman Gate violence accused whose bail order was set aside by the Delhi High Court and the matter was remanded to the trial court for reconsideration.
Additional Sessions Judge Joginder Prakash Nahar was hearing the bail application of accused Ubedullah, who was allegedly part of the mob that indulged in stone-pelting during a demolition exercise near Faiz-e-Elahi mosque at Turkman Gate early this month.
“Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, the prima facie connection of this accused with the stone pelting crowd or slogan shouting crowd is not seen, which is further subject to investigation. No useful purpose will be served in keeping this accused further in custody who is submitted to be 25 years of age,” the court said.
Counsels for the accused, A F Faizi and M K Malik, seeking bail for their client, argued that Ubedullah was not part of the mob and had just come out of his house to find out the whereabouts of his minor sister.
“If you see the CCTV footage, I came out of my house to find my minor sister, whom I couldn’t find. You can notice that I spoke to a child first in the video; I was only asking about the whereabouts of my sister,” Ubedullah’s counsel Faizi said.
Opposing the bail, Additional Public Prosecutor Gyan Chandra Soni argued in the court that the accused was involved with the mob despite knowing that BNS Section 163 (power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger) was imposed in that area.
“Investigation is underway, and the CCTV footage showed that he was there at the time of violence. The nature of the allegations against him are very serious in nature,” he said.
He submitted that the release of Ubedullah could result in tampering with evidence and could influence other witnesses and accused persons.
To this, the court said that it is not shown by the prosecution how the accused can influence a police witness or other prosecution witness in light of his conduct of joining the investigation immediately.
The judge, noting the fact that the accused’s residence was near the violence site, asked the investigating officer (IO) for more evidence other than the CCTV footage in which he did not seem to be part of the mob.
IO Rohit Kumar responded that his team is examining more CCTV footage to collect more evidence, but eyewitness statements have already verified the presence of the accused with the mob.
The judge said, “I view the fact that his presence at the spot was natural, having his house nearby in the Gali. It is not the case of the prosecution that all the people walking in the Gali had violated Section 163 of BNSS.”
The Delhi Police is preparing to challenge the court’s bail order in higher court, sources told PTI.
While remanding the case to the trial court for reconsideration, the high court on January 21 said it was extremely cautious in interfering with the liberty granted to an individual, but this was an “exceptional” case where bail was granted to Ubedullah, a street vendor, through a “cryptic and unreasoned” order.
What happened at Turkman Gate
The case pertains to violence during an anti-encroachment drive near the mosque in the Ramlila Maidan area on the intervening night of January 6 and 7.
The police said rumours were spread on social media that the mosque opposite Turkman Gate was being demolished, prompting people to gather at the spot.
They said around 150-200 people hurled stones and glass bottles at the police and MCD personnel, injuring six policemen, including the area’s station house officer. Up to 20 people have been arrested so far in connection with the violence.
