Northeast Delhi riots 2020: Court orders framing charges of arson, theft against 5 accused

A local sessions court has issued an order for the formal charging of five individuals in connection with a case relating to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots. The court asserted that there exists a “prima facie” basis for the charges, which include accusations of rioting, arson, and theft.

The case under consideration involves Ankit, Sourabh Sharma, Rohit, Rahul Kumar, and Sachin, who stand accused of participating in a riotous mob responsible for setting fire to a place of worship and other properties, in addition to committing theft in Karwal Nagar on February 25, 2020.

In an order delivered on Monday, Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala stated, “I find that a prima facie case is made out against the accused persons.”

The accused individuals are deemed fit to face trial for violations under sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including:

• Section 148 (rioting, armed with a deadly weapon)
• Section 149 (unlawful assembly)
• Section 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by a public servant)
• Section 380 (theft in a dwelling house)
• Section 427 (committing mischief and thereby causing loss or damage to the amount of Rs 50 or upwards)

Additionally, the five accused will be subjected to trial for offenses outlined in the following IPC sections:

• Section 435 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to an amount of Rs 100 or upwards)
• Section 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy a building)
• Section 450 (house-trespass to commit an offense punishable with imprisonment for life), as noted by ASJ Pramachala.

Drawing attention to the statements provided by witnesses, including two police officers, the court pointed out the occurrence of an unlawful assembly responsible for vandalizing properties belonging to a specific community.

The court observed, “They trespassed into houses of the victims so as to vandalize and set them on fire. Thus, they were acting out of a common object being shared by all the members of that assembly. Accused persons were duly identified by these witnesses.”

(With PTI inputs)