Snehal Upadhyay-
Published on: August 7, 2021, at 11:57 IST
An accused in the Delhi Riots case told Delhi High Court while seeking bail, there are loopholes and contradictions in the investigation done by the Delhi Police.
The accused further said, “Nobody in the country is safe if the court does not take a judicial note of prosecution’s manipulation of witnesses and other crucial facets of the investigation.”
Senior Advocate Rebecca John represented the accused Shadab Ahmed said that the structure of the whole criminal trial depends upon a free and fair trial coupled with a fair investigation.
A single bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with the bail application, which was filed on behalf of all the eleven people accused in the Delhi riots case.
Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir along with Senior Advocate Rebecca John asked rebuttal questions from SPP Amit Prasad along with ASG SV Raju, after they had concluded their submissions for the Prosecution.
The senior advocate further contended that there was no presence of Shadab Ahmed at the crime scene or the place where the violence broke out.
John submitted that the witness has given its statement against the police that the provocation was done by the police, which later caused agony amongst people from the nearby areas.
Referring to the second witness, the advocate stated that Ahmad had only one role to play in this whole thing that was of providing food to the people who were on the stage.
Lastly, the advocate indicating on the third witness who was an independent witness, contended that his supplementary statement was recorded two days after the recording of his statement made under Section 164 CrPC.(Confession made by an accused person)
After hearing all the contentions, the Court adjourned the matter for further hearing to 9th August.
Also Read-
SC tells Delhi Police that it’s unlikely to dismiss Bail given to Activists in Riots Case
