New Delhi, May 25 (ILNS): The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man, accused in the North East Delhi riots of last year and who is suffering from acute and transient psychotic disorder (ATPD).
Justice Suresh Kumar Kait passed this order, while hearing the man’s bail application in cases registered against him in Dayalpur police station under relevant Sections of IPC, the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, and the Arms Act, 1959.
The Special Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is suffering from ATPD and that he was admitted to the Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences, Dilshad Garden, Delhi (IHBAS).
The Counsel also submitted, however, that there are different subtypes of ATPD, some of which have a maximum duration of symptoms for one month and others for a maximum duration of three months.
After hearing both the parties, the court concluded that the petitioner has been behind bars in this case since November 19, 2020 and in view of the facts and circumstances of this case, the court finds that the petitioner cannot be made to languish behind bars for an indefinite period of time.
In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail.
The High Court noted that the Trial court, while granting bail to the petitioner in another FIR, had observed that the prosecution had opposed the bail on the strength of CCTV footage, wherein the petitioner could be seen holding a ‘danda (stick)’ in his hands and of having been specifically identified by official witness beat constable Mukesh, but has doubted the statement of this witness Mukesh.
“Though this court refrains from commenting upon the credibility of Mukesh amidst trial, yet takes notice of the fact that the identification of petitioner by the prosecution before the trial court and this court is at variance. In one of the videos played before this Court, a person (allegedly the petitioner) ‘showing his back’ and walking with the mob is shown, whereas in another clipping, the distance between the camera and person is such that the face and features cannot be seen clearly to identify correctly as to who the person is.
“Further, the case of prosecution is that the petitioner had burnt his clothes to hide his identity and these facts, prima facie, bring the case of prosecution under cloud,” said the Delhi High Court.
The FIR in question was registered on February 25, 2020 at the instance of Constable Sunil, posted at police station Dayalpuri, Delhi, who on February 24, along with other members of the police team, was deployed at Chand Bagh, Delhi, and were brutally attacked by the mob during riots.
In the alleged incident, head constable Ratan Lal lost his life, while DCP Shahdara and ACP Gokulpuri sustained grievous injuries.
Tanveer Ahmed, Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner’s name was not there in the FIR in question and in the charge sheet. Thereafter, the prosecuting agency further investigated the case and filed three supplementary charge sheets, still petitioner was not chargesheeted.
However, his name has been mentioned in the fourth supplementary charge sheet and the only allegations against the petitioner is that in the footage of CCTV camera installed by GNCT of Delhi and a video shot by one Vishal Chaudhary, he is seen as part of the mob and pelting stones. ILNS\KR\SJ\RJ