New Delhi [India], February 12 : Delhi's Tis Hazari court on Thursday reserved an order on the bail pleas of 12 accused arrested in the Turkman Gate stone pelting case. An FIR was lodged at Chandani Mahal police station in January. This case pertains to stone pelting during anti encroachment drive on the intervening night of 6 and 7 January.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Bhupinder Singh reserved order after hearing submissions of counsel for the accused persons and the public prosecutor for the Delhi police.
The court is likely to pronounce an order on February 16.
The court heard the bail pleas of Accused persons Mohammed Imran, Mohammed Adnan, Adnan, Mohammed Naved, Mohammed Ubaidullah, Amir Hamza, Mohammed Aadil, Sameer Hussain, Mohammed Athar, Mohammed Kaif, Mohammed Kashif, and Mohammed Areeb.
Counsel for accsued submitted that most of acused person are residing in the vicinity of the place of the incident. Therefore, their Mobile location was found near the Masjid Faiz Ilahi, the place of stone pelting.
It was also submitted that the accused persons went there in search of their relatives or family members. There is no CCTV footage to show they were involved in stone pelting.
The counsel for one of the accused submitted on the issue of "instigating messages" found on his mobile phone and argued that his client had only forwarded the messages but is not the original poster of the messages.
Delhi police has invoked section 307 (Attempt to murder ) of IPC. The Counsel argued that invoking section 307 IPC was too grave for what had happened that night.
The MLC of injured person shows none of the injuries on vital parts occurred with the common object and intention of causing death of the public servants.
On January 14, the Tis Hazari Court rejected the bail pleas of 5 Accused persons, noting the seriousness of allegations against them and the initial stage of the investigation.
"The relentless pelting of stones, damage to government property and the injury sustained by the police officials, while the discharge of their official duties, is indeed not a simpliciter case of assault but an attack on the administration," the court had observed.
"Hence, considering the seriousness of allegations, stage of investigation, the court deems it apposite to dismiss applications of the accused persons, namely, Mohammad Areeb, Mohd Kaif, Mohd Kashif, Adnan and Sameer. Hence, the bail applications are dismissed and disposed of accordingly," JMFC Sayesha Chaddha ordered on January 14.
Advocate M Asad Beig had appeared for Kaif, Kasif and Areeb. It was argued that the accused persons were apprehended at around 3 AM on January 7 ,before the registration of FIR at 10.07 AM in the morning.
It was submitted that Kaif was at his house from 7 PM till the time he was apprehended by the police. This fact is established by the CCTV.
It was also submitted that Areeb was at Chitli kabar at the time of the incident. This place is around 1-2 kilometres from the place of incident. They are residents of the same locality near the place of incident, therefore their location is falling in the same area.
On behalf of Adnan, it was submitted that he was apprehended from his house around 1.30 AM. He was not visible in the CCTV footage police were relying upon.
On the other hand, Delhi Police opposed the bail pleas. Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Shrivastava submitted that the anti-encroachment drive near the masjid Faiz E Elahi was carried out in pursuant to the order of the Delhi High court.
Before carrying out the drive, the DCP made a request of peace, and prohibitory order was issued by the police, the police said.
Accused persons were involved in stone pelting and instigating other people. Delhi police relied upon the WhatsApp msg and videos, APP Shrivastava had argued.
Prosecution had said that Adnan's mobile had an instigating message, and he further sent the same to some groups.
It was not a simple assault on police persons, it was an attack on the system, APP Shrivastava had argued.
It was also submitted that Kaif and Kashif were arrested on the basis of their identification in the CCTV.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor