2020 Northeast Delhi Riots: Man Accused Of Giving Gun To Shahrukh Pathan, Released By Court

Delhi’s Karkardooma Court on Monday released Babu Wasim, who was accused of providing a gun to Shahrukh Pathan, an accused in a Northeast Delhi riots case. Pathan allegedly fired at a police officer with the weapon during the 2020 riots.

Wasim who was arrested on April 13, last year was released on Monday under Section 25 of the Arms Act by Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat. However, a charge of non-appearance in response to a proclamation under Section 174A of the IPC was filed against him.

The prosecution had alleged that on December 6, 2019, Wasim gave Pathan a pistol and rounds, which he then used for “firing and also attempting on the life of a head constable” during the riots. Its pictures had also gone viral on social media.

The FIR was filed at the Delhi’s Jafrabad police station under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on the basis of religion or other factors), 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), and 188 (disobedience to an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant) 307 (Attempt to murder), 353 (Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief), 120­B (Criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention) of IPC along with Section 27 (Punishment for using arms, etc) of Arms Act.

According to the police, Pathan repeatedly called Wasim on the night of December 6, 2019. It was claimed that both accused’s location charts showed that at the end of their last call, they were in the same location. It was also alleged that they had met and that Wasim had given Pathan the pistol.

The prosecution had relied on both accused persons’ disclosure statements as well as their successive phone calls made between the two.

The court discharged Wasim under Section 25 of the Arms Act, stating that disclosure statements are not admissible in law on their own, and that there is no witness on record to show that Wasim provided the pistol to Pathan or that he possessed it before December 6, 2019.

The judge stated that the Sanction Order issued by police under Section 39 of the Arms Act was “without proper appreciation of material on record or evidence collected by IO.”

The Court stated that, “The case against accused Babu Wasim is based primarily on surmises and conjectures rather than actual material/evidence. There is no reason to presume that accused Babu Wasim violated Section 25 of the Arms Act. He is discharged for the aforementioned offence.”