Shahrukh Pathan, who is seeking bail in a case relating to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, told the Delhi High Court on Tuesday that no role has been assigned to him and that the “entire case is a farce.”
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma was hearing Pathan’s bail plea in a case involving rioting and the injuring of police officers, including one Rohit Shukla, by an armed mob. Separately, he is facing charges in another case for pointing a gun at a police officer.
The trial judge denied Pathan’s bail plea in December 2021. In this case, charges have already been filed against him. Pathan applied for bail in the High Court in January of last year.
During today’s hearing, Pathan’s lawyer, Advocate Khalid Akhtar, argued that, despite the fact that there are four other accused people in the case, Pathan is the only one who was not named in the FIR or identified by anyone, and yet he was imprisoned while the others were released on bail.
“Both the bail application and the charge arguments were heard concurrently. Bail was denied because he [Pathan] is accused in another case, he could be a flight risk, and there were contradictions in statements that are the basis of the trial. The FIR names five people as accused. I am the only individual who is neither named nor identified, whereas everyone else is both named and identifiable. Despite the fact that the victim has revealed their addresses, all of them have been given bail, leaving me as the only one behind prison… The entire case is a farce,” he concluded.
Akhtar further informed the court that the bail petition had been pending for 15 months and that Pathan had been imprisoned for three years and one month.
“I am not assigned a role. It’s not their case that I shot the victim…. The principal victim has been thoroughly examined. That is a contradiction in terms. There is nothing,” he said.
The court adjourned the hearing to July 24 and instructed the Special Public Prosecutor for the Delhi Police to file a chart outlining the roles of the accused, including Pathan, and the evidence attributed to them.
Earlier in February, Akhtar complained about a significant delay in the trial’s conclusion.
Pathan has previously said that there are numerous differences between the time stated in the MLC, when Shukla was allegedly shot, and his comments recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC.
Pathan has been in jail since April 3, 2020, according to the submission, and the inquiry is complete.
He also argued that because Pathan is the subject of two investigations, the investigation agency used evidence from FIR 51/2020 to falsely incriminate him in the current case.
The trial court denied him bail because CCTV footage from a neighbouring camera located at the relevant site showed his presence in the mob.
The FIR was filed under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (Rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 188 (Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, etc.), 283 (Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation), 353 (Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 332 (Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 307 (attempt to murder), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) r/w 34 of IPC along with sec. 27 of the Arms Act.
